Class J^lJJkl^ 

Book. > ^ 

Copyright ^j^' 

COPyRIGHT DEPOStr. 



MORAL BRIEFS. 

A CONCISE, REASONED AND POPULAR 
EXPOSITION OF CATHOLIC MORALS. 



BY 

Rev. JOHN Hr'STAPLETON. 



New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: 
BENZIQER BROTHKRS, 

Printers io the Holy Apostolic See. 
1904 



I. J 

•flfbil ©bstat 

Remy Lafort, 

Censor Librorum. 



Imprimatur, 

John M. Farley, 

Archbishop of New York. 



New York, March 25, 1904. 



Copyright, 1904, by Benziger Brothers. 



PREFACE. 



The contents of this volume appeared originally 
in The Catholic Transcript, of Hartford, Connecti- 
cut, in weekly instalments, from February, 1901, to 
February, 1903. During the course of their publica- 
tion, it became evident that the form of instruction 
adopted was appreciated by a large number of read- 
ers in varied conditions of life — this appreciation 
being evinced, among other ways, by a frequent and 
widespread demand for back-numbers of the publish- 
ing journal. The management, finding itself unable 
to meet this demand, suggested the bringing out of 
the entire series in book-form ; and thus, with very 
few corrections, we offer the " Briefs " to all desir- 
ous of a better acquaintance with Catholic Morals. 

The Author. 



CONTENTS. 



I. Believing and Doing 9 

II. The Moral Agent 13. 

III. Conscience 17 

IV. Laxity and Scruples 21 

V. The Law of God and Its Breach ... 24 

VL Sin 28 

VII. How to Count Sins 32 

VIII. Capital Sins 26 

IX. Pride .40 

X. Covetousness 44 

XI. Lust 47 

XII. Anger 51 

XIII. Gluttony 55 

XIV. Drink 59 

XV. Envy 62 

XVI. Sloth 65 

XVII. What We Believe 68 

XVIII. Why We Believe 71 

XIX. Whence Our Belief : Reason .... 73 

XX. Whence Our Belief : Grace and Will . 76 

XXI. How We Believe 79 

XXII. Faith and Error S2 

XXIII. The Consistent Believer 85 

XXIV. Unbelief 89 

XXV. How Faith May Be Lost 92 

XXVI. Hope 96 

XXVII. Love of God 99 

XXVIII. Love of Neighbor . 102 

XXIX. Prayer 104 

XXX. Petitions 107 

XXXI. Religion 110 

XXXII. Devotions .118 



CONTENTS. 



XXXIII. Idolatry and Superstition 11« 

XXXIV. Occultism 119 

XXXV. Christian Science 121 

XXXVI. Swearing 127 

XXXVII. Oaths 130 

XXXVIII. Vows 132 

XXXIX. The Professional Vowp 135 

XLr. The Profession 138 

XLI. The Religious 140 

XLII. The Vow of Poverty 143 

XLIII. The Vow of Obedience . .... 146 

XLIV. The Vow of Chastity 149 

XLV. Blasphemy 152 

XLVI. Cursing 155 

XLVII. Profanity 157 

XL VIII. The Law of Rest 160 

XLIX. The Day of Rest 162 

L. Keeping the Lord's Day Holy ... 165 

LI. Worship of Sacrifice 167 

LII. Worship of Rest 170 

LIII. Servile Works 178 

LIV. Common Works 176 

LV. Parental Dignity 179 

LVI. Filial Respect 181 

LVII. Filial Love 184 

LVIIL Authority and Obediencs .... 186 

LIX. Should We Help Our Parents? ... 189 

LX. Disinterested Love in Parents ... 191 

LXL Educate the Children 194 

LXII. Educational Extravagance .... 11)7 

LXIII. Godless Education 200 

LXIV. Catholic Schools 502 

LXV. Some Weak Points in the Catholic School 

System 205 

LXVI. Correction 20S 

LXVII. Justice and Rights 211 

LXVIII. Homicide 213 

LXIX. Is Sucide a Sin ? 31» 

LXX. Self-Defense 219 

ILXXI. Murder Often Sanctioned .... 222 



CONTENTS. 



LXXII. On the Ethics of War 225 

LXXIII. The Massacre of the Innocents ... 228 

LXXIV. Enmity 231 

LXXV. Our Enemies 233 

LXXVI. Immorality 23« 

LXXVII. The Sink of Iniquity 239 

LXXVIII. Wherein Nature Is Opposed ... 242 

LXXIX. Hearts 245 

KXXX. Occasions ........ 248 

LXXXI. Scandal 251 

LXXXII. Not Good to Be Alone 254 

LXXXIII. A Helping Hand 257 

LrXXXIV. Thou Shalt Not Steal 2«0 

LXXXV. Petty Thefts 264 

LXXXVI. An Oft Exploited, But Specious Plea . 267 

LXXXVII. Contumely 270 

L.XXXVIII. Defamation 278 

LXXXIX. Detraction . 276 

XC. Calumny 279 

XCI. Rash Judgment 283 

XCII. Mendacity 286 

XCIII. Concealing the Truth 289 

XCIV. Restitution 292 

XCV. Undoing the Evil 295 

XCVI. Paying Back 299 

XCVII. Getting Rid of Ill-Gotten Goods ... 302 

XCVIII. What Excuses From Restitution . . 305 

XCIX. Debts 308 



MORAL BRIEFS 



CHAPTER I. 
BELIEVING AND DOING. 

Morals pertain to right living, to the things we 
do, in relation to God and His law, as opposed to 
right thinking, to what we believe, to dogma. Dogma 
directs our faith or belief, morals shape our lives. By 
faith we know God, by moral living we serve Him ; 
and this double homage, of otir mind and our works, 
is the worship we owe our Creator and Master and 
the necessary condition of our salvation. 

Faith alone will save no man. It may be con- 
venient for the easy-going to deny this, and take an 
opposite view of the matter; but convenience is not 
always a safe counsellor. It may be that the just 
man liveth by faith ; but he lives not by faith alone. 
Or, if he does, it is faith of a different sort from 
what we define here as faith, viz., a firm assent of the 
mind to truths revealed. We have the testimony of 
Holy Writ, again and again reiterated, that faith, 
even were it capable of moving mountains, without 
good works is of no avail. The Catholic Church is 
convinced that this doctrine is genuine and reliable 
enough to make it her own ; and sensible enough, too. 
For faith does not make a man impeccable; he may 
believe rightly, and live badly. His knowledge of 
what God expects of him will not prevent him from 
doing just the contrary ; sin is as easy to a believer as 
to an unbeliever. And he who pretends to have found 
feligion, holiness, the Holy Ghost, or whatever else 
he may call it, and can therefore no longer prevari- 



lO 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



cate against the law, is, to common-sense people, 
nothing but a sanctified humbug or a pious idiot. 

Nor are good works alone sufficient. Men of 
emancipated intelligence and becoming breadth of 
mind, are often heard to proclaim with a greater 
flourish of verbosity than of reason and argument, 
that the golden rule is religion enough for them, with- 
out the trappings of creeds and dogmas ; they respect 
themselves and respect their neighbors, at least they 
say they do, and this, according to them, is the ful- 
filment of the law\ We submit that this sort of wor- 
ship was in vogue a good many centuries before the 
God-Man came down upon earth; and if it fills the 
bill now, as it did in those days, it is difficult to see 
the utility of Christ's coming, of His giving of a law 
of belief and of His founding of a Church. It is 
beyond human comprehension that He should have 
come for naught, labored for naught and died for 
naught. And such must be the case, if the observ- 
ance of the natural law is a sufficient worship of the 
Creator. What reasons Christ may have had for im- 
posing this or that truth upon our belief, is beside 
the question; it is enough that He did reveal truths, 
the acceptance of which glorifies Him in the mind of 
the believer, in order that the mere keeping of the 
commandments appear forthwith an insufficient mode 
of worship. 

Besides, morals are based on dogma, or they 
have no basis at all ; knowledge of the manner of 
serving God can only proceed from knowledge of who 
and what He is ; right living is the fruit of right 
thinking. Not that all w^ho believe rightly are right- 
eous and walk in the path of salvation: losing them- 
selves, these are lost in spite of the truths they know 
and profess ; nor that they who cling to an erroneous 
belief and a false creed can perform no deed of true 
moral worth and are doomed ; they may be righteous 
in spite of the errors they profess, thanks alone to 
the truths in their creeds that are not wholly cor- 



BELIEVING AND DOING. 



II 



rupted. But the natural order of things demands 
that our works partake of the nature of our convic- 
tions, that truth or error in mind beget truth or error 
correspondingly in deed and that no amount of self- 
confidence in a man can make a course right when it 
is wrong, can make a man's actions good when they 
are materially bad. This is the principle of the tree 
and its fruit and it is too old-fashioned to be easily 
denied. True morals spring from true faith and true 
dogma ; a false creed cannot teach correct morality, 
unless accidentally, as the result of a sprinkling of 
truth through the mass of false teaching. The only 
accredited moral instructor is the true Church. Where 
there is no dogma, there can logically be no morals, 
save such as human instinct and reason devise; but 
this is an absurd morality, since there is no recogni- 
tion of an authority, of a legislator, to make the moral 
law binding and to give it a sanction. He who 
says he is a law unto himself chooses thus to veil his 
proclaiming freedom from all law. His golden rule 
is a thing too easily twistable to be of any assured ben- 
efit to others than himself ; his moral sense, that is, 
his sense of right and wrong, is very likely where his 
faith is — nowhere. 

It goes without saying that the requirements of 
good morals are a heavy burden for the. natural man, 
that is, for man left, in the midst of seductions and al- 
lurements, to the purely human resources of his own 
unaided wit and strength ; so heavy a burden is this, in 
fact, that according to Catholic doctrine, it cannot be 
borne without assistance from on high, the which 
assistance we call grace. This supernatural aid we 
believe essential to the shaping of a good moral life ; 
for man, being destined, in preference to all the rest 
of^ animal creation, to a supernatural end, is thereby 
raised from the natural to a supernatural order. The 
requirements of this order are therefore above and 
beyond his native powers and can only be met with 
the help of a force above his own. It is labor lost for 



12 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



US to strive to climb the clouds on a ladder of our 
own make; the ladder must be let down from above. 
Human air-ships are a futile invention and cannot be 
made to steer straight or to soar high in the atmos- 
phere of the supernatural. One-half of those who fail 
in moral matters are those who trust altogether, or 
too much, in their own strength, and reckon without 
the power that said " Without Me you can do noth- 
ing." 

The other half go to the other extreme. They im- 
agine that the Almighty should not only direct and aid 
them, but also that He should come down and drag 
them along in spite of themselves ; and they complain 
when He does not, excuse and justify themselves on 
the ground that He does not, and blame Him for 
their failure to walk straight in the narrow path. 
They expect Him to pull them from the clutches of 
temptation into which they have deliberately walked. 
The drunkard expects Him to knock the glass out of 
his hand : the imprudent, the inquisitive and the vicious 
would have it so that they might play with fire, 
5^ea, even put in their hand, and not be scorched or 
burnt. 'Tis a miracle they want, a miracle at every 
turn, a suspension of the laws of nature to save them 
from the effects of their voluntary perverseness. Too 
lazy to employ the means at their command, they 
thrust the whole burden on the Maker. God helps 
those who help themselves. A supernatural state 
does not dispense us from the obligation of practising 
natural virtue. You can build a supernatural life 
only on the foundations of a natural life. To do away 
with the latter is to build in the air ; the structure will 
not stay up, it will and must come down at the first 
blast of temptation. 

Catholic morals therefore require faith in re- 
vealed truths, of which they are but deductions, 
logical conclusions ; they presuppose, in their observ- 
ance, the grace of God ; and call for a certain stren- 
uosity of life without which nothing meritorious can 



THE MOilAL AGENT. 



13 



be effected. We must be convinced of the right God 
has to trace a Hne of conduct for us ; we must be as 
earnest in enlisting His assistance as if all depended 
on Him ; and then go to work as if it all depended on 
ourselves. 



CHAPTER n. 
THE MORAL AGENT. 

Morals are for man, not for the brute ; they are 
concerned with his thoughts, desires, words and 
deeds ; they suppose a moral agent. 

What is a moral agent? 

A moral agent is one who, in the conduct of his 
life, is capable of good and evil, and who, in conse- 
quence of this faculty of choosing between right and 
wrong is responsible to God for the good and evil 
he does. 

Is it enough, in order to qualify as a moral and 
responsible agent, to be in a position to respect or to 
violate the Law? 

It is not enough ; but it is necessary that the 
agent know what he is doing ; know that it is right or 
wrong ; that he will to do it, as such ; and that he be 
free to do it, or not to do it. Whenever any one of 
these three elements — knowledge, consent and liberty 
— is wanting in the commission or omission of any 
act, the deed is not a moral deed; and the agent, 
under the circumstances, is not a moral agent. 

When God created man, He did not make him 
simply a being that walks and talks, sleeps and 
eats, laughs and cries ; He endowed him with the 
faculties of intelligence and free will. More than 
this. He intended that these faculties should be exer- 
cised in all the details of life; that the intelligence 
should direct, and the free will approve, every step 



14 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



taken, every act performed, every deed left undone. 
Human energy being thus controlled, all that man 
does is said to be voluntary and bears the peculiar 
stamp of morality, the quality of being good or evil 
in the sight of God and worthy of His praise or 
blame, according as it squares or not with the Rule 
of Morality laid down by Him for the shaping of 
human life. Of all else He takes no cognizance, since 
all else refers to Him not indifferently from the rest 
of animal creation, and offers no higher homage than 
that of instinct and necessity. 

When a man in his waking hours does something 
in which his intelligence has no share, does it without 
being aware of what he is doing, he is said to be in a 
state of mental aberration, which is only another name 
for insanity or folly, whether it be momentary or 
permanent of its nature. A human being, in such a 
condition, stands on the same plane with the animal, 
with this difference, that the one is a freak and the 
other is not. Morals, good or bad, have no meaning 
for either. 

If the will or consent has no part in what is done, 
we do nothing, another acts through us ; 'tis not ours, 
but the deed of another. An instrument or tool used 
in the accomplishment of a purpose possesses the 
same negative merit or demerit, whether it be a thing 
without a will or an unwilling human being. If we 
are not free, have no choice in the matter, must con- 
sent, we differ in nothing from all brutish and inan- 
imate nature that follows necessarily, fatally, the bent 
of its instinctive inclinations and obeys the laws of 
its being. Under these conditions, there can be no 
morality or responsibility before God ; our deeds are 
alike blameless and valueless in His sight. 

Thus, the simple transgression of the Law does 
not constitute us in guilt; we must transgress delib- 
erately, wilfully. Full inadvertence, perfect forget- 
fulness, total blindness is called invincible ignorance; 
this destroys utterly the moral act and makes us in- 
voluntary agents. When knowledge is incomplete. 



THE MORAL AGENT. 



15 



the act is less voluntary; except it be the case of 
ignorance brought on purposely, a wilful blinding of 
oneself, in the vain hope of escaping the consequences 
of one's acts. This betrays a stronger willingness to 
act, a more deliberately set will. 

Concupiscence has a kindred effect on our rea- 
son. It is a consequence of our fallen nature by 
which we are prone to evil rather than to good, find 
it more to our taste and easier to yield to wrong than 
to resist it. Call it passion, temperament, character, 
what you will, — it is an inclination to evil. We can- 
not always control its action. Everyone has felt more 
or less the tyranny of concupiscence, and no child of 
Adam but has it branded in his nature and flesh. 
Passion may rob us of our reason, and run into folly 
or insanity ; in which event we are unconscious agents, 
and do nothing voluntary. It may so obscure the 
reason as to make us less ourselves, and consequently 
less willing. But there is such a thing as, with studied 
and refined malice and depravity, to purposely and 
artificially, as it were, excite concupiscence, in order 
the more intensely and savagely to act. This is only 
a proof of greater deliberation, and renders the deed 
all the more voluntary. 

A person is therefore more or less responsible 
according as what he does, or the good or evil of what 
he does, is more or less clear to him. Ignorance or 
the passions may affect his clear vision of right and 
wrong, and under the stress of this deception, wring 
a reluctant yielding of the will, a consent only half 
willingly given. Because there is consent, there is guilt 
but the guilt is measured by the degree of premedita- 
tion. God looks upon things solely in their relation to 
Him. An abomination before men may be some- 
thing very different in His sight who searches the 
heart and reins of man and measures evil by the 
malice of the evil-doer. The only good or evil He 
sees in our deeds is the good or evil we ourselves see 
in them before or while we act. 



i6 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Violence and fear may oppress the will, and 
thereby prove destructive to the morality of an act and 
the responsibility of the agent. Certain it is, that 
we can be forced to act against our will, to perform 
that which we abhor, and do not consent to do. 
Such force may be brought to bear upon us as we 
cannot withstand. Fear may influence us in a like 
manner. It may paralyze our faculties and rob us of 
our senses. Evidently, under these conditions, no 
voluntary act is possible, since the will does not con- 
cur and no consent is given. The subject becomes 
a mere tool in the hands of another. 

Can violence and fear do more than this? Can 
it not only rob us of the power to will, not only force 
us to act without consent, but also force the will, 
force us to consent? Never; and the simple reason 
is that we cannot do two contradictory things at 
the same time — consent and not consent, for that is 
what it means to be forced to consent. Violence and 
fear may weaken the will so that it finally yield. The 
fault, if fault there be, may be less inexcusable by 
reason of the pressure under which it labored. But 
once we have willed, we have willed, and essentiall}^ 
there is nothing unwilling about what is willingly 
done. 

The will is an inviolable shrine. Men may cir- 
cumvent, attack, seduce and weaken it. But it can- 
not be forced. The power of man and devil cannot 
go so far. Even God respects it to that point. 

In all cases of pressure being brought to bear 
upon the moral agent for an evil purpose, when re- 
sistance is possible, resistance alone can save him 
from the consequences. He must resist to his utmost, 
to the end, never yield, if he would not incur the re- 
sponsibility of a free agent. Non-resistatice betokens 
nerfect willingness to act. The greater the resistance, 
the less voluntary the act in the event of consent be- 
ing finally given ; for resistance implies reluctance, 
and reluctance is the opposition of a will that battles 



CONSCIENCE. 



17 



against an oppressing influence. In moral matters, 
defeat can never be condoned, no matter how great 
the struggle, if there is a final yielding of the will; 
but the circumstance of energetic defense stands to 
a man's credit and will protect him from much of the 
blame and disgrace due to defea<t. 

Thus we see that the first quality of the acts 
of a moral agent is that he think, desire, say and 
do with knowledge and free consent. Such acts, 
and only such, can be called good or bad. Whait 
makes them good and bad, is another question. 



CHAPTER III. 
CONSCIENCE. 

The will of God, announced to the world at 
large, is known as the Law of God; manifested to 
each individual soul, it is called conscience. These 
are not two different rules of morality, but one and 
the same rule. The latter is a form or copy of 
the former. One is the will of God, the other is its 
echo in our souls. 

We might fancy God, at the beginning of all 
things, speaking His will concerning right and 
wrong, in the presence of the myriads of souls that 
lay in the state of possibility. And when, in the 
course of time, these souls come into being, with 
unfailing regularity, at every act, conscience, like a 
spiritual phonograph, gives back His accents and re- 
echoes: "it is lawful," or "it is not lawful." Or, 
to use another simile, conscience is the compass by 
which we steer arisfht our moral lives towards the 
haven of our souls* destination in eternity. But 
just as behind the mariner's compass is the great 
unseen power, called attraction, under whose 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



influence the needle points to the star ; so does the will 
or Law of God control the action of the conscience, 
and direct it faithfully towards what is good. 

We have seen that, in order to prevaricate it is 
not sufficient to transgress the Law of God: we must 
know ; conscience makes us know. It is only when 
we go counter to its dictates that we are constituted 
evil-doers. And at the bar of God's justice, it is on 
the testimony of conscience that sentence will be 
passed. Her voice will be that of a witness present 
at every deed, good or evil, of our lives. 

Conscience should always tell the truth, and tell 
it with certainty. Practically, this is not always the 
case. We are sometimes certain that a thing is right 
when it is really wrong. There are therefore two 
kinds of conscience: a true and a certain conscience, 
and they are far from being one and the same thing. 
A true conscience speaks the truth, that is, tells us 
what is truly right and truly wrong. It is a gen- 
uine echo of the voice of God. A certain conscience, 
whether it speaks the truth or not, speaks with as- 
surance, without a suspicion of error, and its voice 
carries conviction. When we act in accordance with 
the first, we are right; we may know it, doubt it or 
think it probable, but we are right in fact. When 
we obey the latter, we know, we are sure that we 
are right, but it is possible that we be in error. A 
true conscience, therefore, may be certain or uncer- 
tain ; a certain conscience may be true or erroneous. 

A true conscience is not the rule of morality. 
It must be certain. It is not necessary that it be 
true, although this is always to be desired, and in 
the normal state of things should be the case. But 
true or false, it must be certain. The reason is 
obvious. God judges us according as we do good or 
evil. Our merit or demerit is dependent upon our 
responsibility. We are responsible only for the good 
or evil we know we do. Knowledge and certainty 
come from a certain conscience, and yet not from 
a true conscience which may be doubtful. 



CONSCIENCE. 



19 



Now, suppose we are in error, and think we are 
doing something good, whereas it is in reaUty evil. 
We perceive no maUce in the deed, and, in perform- 
ing it, there is consequently no malice in us, we do 
not sin. The act is said to be materially evil, but 
formally good; and for such evil God cannot hold 
us responsible. Suppose again that we err, and that 
the evil we think we do is really good. In this 
instance, first, the law of morality is violated, — a cer- 
tain, though erroneous conscience: this is sinful. 
Secondly, a bad motive vitiates an act, even if the 
deed in itself be good. Consequently, we incur guilt 
and God's wrath by the commission of such a deed, 
which is materially good, but formally bad. 

One may wonder and say: "how can guilt at- 
tach to doing good?" Guilt attaches to formal evil, 
that is, evil that is shown to us by our conscience 
and committed by us as such. The wrong comes, 
not from the object of our doing which is good, but 
from the intention which is bad. It is true that 
nothing is good that is not thoroughly good, that a 
thing is bad only when there is something lacking in 
its goodness, that evil is a defect of goodness; but 
formal evil alone can be imputed to us and material 
cannot. The one is a conscious, the other an un- 
conscious, defect. Here an erroneous conscience is 
obeyed ; there the same conscience is disregarded. 
And that kind of a conscience is the rule of morality ; 
to go against it is to sin. 

There are times when we ha^ve no certitude. The 
conscience may have nothing to say concerning the 
honesty of a cause to which we are about to commit 
ourselves. This state of uncertainty and perplexity 
is called doubt. To doubt is to suspend judgment; 
a dubious conscience is one that does not function. 

In doubt the question may be: "To do; is it 
right or wrong? May I perform this act, or must 
I abstain therefrom?" In this case, we inquire 
whether it be lawful or unlawful to go on, but we 



20 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



are sure that it is lawful not to act. There is but 
one course to pursue. We must not commit our- 
selves and must refrain from acting, until such a 
time, at least, as, by inquiring and considering, we 
shall have obtained sufficient evidence to convince 
us that we may allow ourselves this liberty without 
incurring guilt. If, on the contrary, while still 
doubting, we persist in committing the act, we sin, 
because in all affairs of right and wrong we must 
follow a certain conscience as the standard of moral- 
ity. 

But the question may be : "To do or not to 
do; which is right and which is wrong?" Here 
we know not which way to turn, fearing evil in 
either alternative. We must do one thing or the 
other. There are reasons and difficulties on both 
sides. We are unable to resolve the difficulties, lay 
the doubt, and form a sure conscience, what must 
we do? 

If all action can be momentarily suspended, and 
we have the means of consulting, we must abstain 
from action and consult. If the affair is urgent, and 
this cannot be done; if we must act on the spot and 
decide for ourselves, then, we can make that dubious 
conscience prudently certain by applying this prin- 
ciple to our conduct: ''Of two evils, choose the 
lesser." We therefore judge which action involves 
the least amount of evil. We may embrace the 
course thus chosen without a fear of doing wrong. 
If we have inadvertently chosen the greater evil, it 
is an error of judgment for which we are in nowise 
responsible before God. But this means must be 
employed only where all other and surer means fail. 
The certainty we thereby acquire is a prudent cer- 
tainty, and is sufficient to guarantee us against of- 
fending. 



CHAPTER IV. 



LAXITY AND SCRUPLES. 

In every question of conscience there are two 
opposing factors : Liberty, which is agreeable to our 
nature, which allows us to do as we list; and Law 
which binds us unto the observance of what is 
unpleasant. Liberty and law are mutually antagonistic. 
A concession in favor of one is an infringement upon 
the claims of the other. 

Conscience, in its normal state, gives to liberty 
and to law what to each is legitimately due, no more, 
no less. 

Truth lies between extremes. At the two opposite 
poles of conscientious rectitude are laxity and 
scruples, one judging all things lawful, the other all 
things forbidden. One inordinately favors liberty, 
the other the law. And neither has sufficient grounds 
on which to form a sound judgment. 

They are counterfeit consciences, the one dis- 
honest, the other unreasonable. They do unlawful 
business ; and because the verdict they render is 
founded on nothing more solid than imaginations, 
they are in nowise standards of morality, and should 
not be considered as such. 

The first is sometimes known as a "rubber" con- 
science, on account of its capacity for stretching it- 
self to meet the exigencies of a like or a dislike. 

Laxity may be the effect of a simple illusion. 
Men often do wrong unawares. They excuse them- 
selves with the plea: 'T did not know any better." 
But we are not here examining the acts that can be 
traced back to self-illusion; rather the state of per- 
5K)ns who labor under the disability of seeing wrong 
anywhere, and who walk through the commandments 
Church with apparent unconcern. 
What must we think of such people in face of the 
fact that they not only could, but should know bet- 



22 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



ter! They are supposed to know their catechism. 
Are there not CathoUc books and pubUcations of va- 
rious sorts? What about the Sunday instructions 
and sermons? These are the means and opportu- 
nities, and they facihtate the fulfilment of what is in 
us a bounden duty to nourish our souls before they 
die of spiritual hunger. 

A delicate, effeminate life, spiritual sloth, and 
criminal neglect are responsible for this kind of lax- 
ity. 

This state of soul is also the inevitable conse- 
quence of long years passed in sin and neglect of 
prayer. Habit blunts the keen edge of perception. 
Evil is disquieting to a novice; but it does not look 
so bad after you have done it a while and get used to 
it. Crimes thus become ordinary sins, and ordinary 
sins peccadillos. 

Then again there are people who, like the Phar- 
isees of old, strain out a gnat and swallow a camel. 
They educate themselves up to a strict observance of 
all things insignificant. They would not forget to say 
grace before and after meals, but would knife the 
neighbor's character or soil their minds with all filth- 
iness, without a scruple or a shadow of remorse. 

These are they who walk in the broad way that 
leadeth to destruction. In the first place, their con- 
science or the thing that does duty for a conscience, 
is false and they are responsible for it. Then, this 
sort of a conscience is not habitually certain, and 
laxity consists precisely in contemning doubts and 
passing over lurking, lingering suspicions as not 
worthy of notice. Lastly, it has not the quality of 
common prudence since the judgment it pronounces 
is not supported by plausible reasons. Its character 
is dishonesty. 

A scruple is a little sharp stone formerly used as 
a measure of weight. Pharmacists always have 
scruples. There is nothing so torturing as to walk 
with one or several of these pebbles in the shoe. Spir- 



LAXITY AND SCRUPLES. 



23 



itual scruples serve the same purpose for the con- 
science. They torture and torment; they make de- 
votion and prayer impossible, and blind the con- 
science; they weaken the mind, exhaust the bodily 
forces, and cause a disease that not infrequently 
comes to a climax in despair or insanity. 

A scrupulous conscience is not to be followed as 
a standard of right and wrong, because it is un- 
reasonable. In its final analysis it is not certain, but 
doubtful and improbable, and is influenced by the most 
futile reasons. It is lawful, it is even necessary, to 
refuse assent to the dictates of such a conscience. 
To persons thus afflicted the authoritative need of a 
prudent adviser must serve as a rule until the con- 
science is cured of its morbid and erratic tendencies. 

It is not scruples to walk in the fear of God, 
and avoid sin and the occasions thereof : that is wis- 
dom ; nor to frequent the sacraments and be assid- 
uous in prayer through a deep concern for the wel- 
fare of one's soul : that is piety. 

It is not scruples to be at a loss to decide whether 
a thing is wrong or right ; that is doubt ; nor to suffer 
keenly after the commission of a grievous sin; that 
is remorse. 

It is not scruples to be greatly anxious and dis- 
turbed over past confessions when there is a reason- 
able cause for it : that is natural. 

A scrupulous person is one who, outside these 
several contingencies, is continually racked with 
fears, and persists, against all evidence, in seeing sin 
where there is none, or magnifies it beyond all pro- 
portion where it really is. 

The first feature — empty and perpetual fears — 
concerns confessions which are sufficient, according 
to^ all the rules of prudence ; prayers, which are said 
with overwrought anxiety, lest a single distraction 
creep in and mar them; and temptations, which are 
resisted with inordinate contention of mind, and per- 
plexity lest consent be given. 



24 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



The other and more desperate feature is perti- 
nacity of judgment. The scrupulous person will ask 
advice and not beheve a word he is told. The more 
information he gets, the worse he becomes, and he 
adds to his misery by consulting every adviser in 
sight. He refuses to be put under obedience and 
seems to have a morbid affection for his very condi- 
tion. 

There is only one remedy for this evil, and that 
remedy is absolute and blind obedience to a prudent 
director. Choose one, consult him as often as you 
desire, but do not leave him for another. Then sub- 
mit punctiliously to his direction. His conscience 
must be yours, for the time being. And if you 
should err in following him, God will hold him, and 
not you, responsible. 



CHAPTER V. 

THE LAW OF GOD AND ITS BREACH. 

Without going into any superflous details, we 
shall call the Law of God an act of His will by which 
He ordains what things we may do or not do, and 
binds us unto observance under penalty of His divine 
displeasure. 

The law thus defined pertains to reasonable be- 
ings alone, and supposes on our part, as we have 
seen, knowledge and free will. The rest of creation 
is blindly submissive under the hand of God, and 
yields a necessary obedience. Man alone can obey 
or disobey; but in this latter case he renders himself 
amenable to God's justice who, as his Creator, has 
an equal right to command him, and be obeyed. 

The Maker first exercised this right when He 
put into His creature's soul a sense of right and 
wrong, which is nothing more than conscience, or as 



THE LAW OF GOD AND ITS BREACH. 



25 



it is called here, natural law. To this law is subject 
every human being, pagan, Jew and Christian alike. 
No creature capable of a human act is exempt. 

The provisions of this law consider the nature 
of our being, that is, the law prescribes what the 
necessities of our being demand, and it prohibits what 
is destructive thereof. Our nature requires 
physically that we eat, drink and sleep. Similarly, in 
a moral sense, it calls for justice, truthfulness, respect 
of God, of the neighbor, and of self. All its precepts 
are summed up in this one: ''Do unto others as you 
would have them do unto you " — the golden rule. 
Thence flows a series of deducted precepts calculated 
to protect the moral and inherent rights of our nature. 

But we are more concerned here with what is 
known as the positive Law of God, given by Him to 
man by word of mouth or revelation. 

We believe that God gave a verbal code to Moses 
who promulgated it in His name before the Jewish 
people to the whole world. It was subsequently in- 
scribed on two stone tables, and is known as the 
Decalogue or Ten Commandments of God. Of these 
ten, the first three pertain to God Himself, the lat- 
ter seven to the neighbor; so that the whole might 
be abridged in these two words, "Love God, and love 
thy neighbor." This law is in reality only a specified 
form of the natural law, and its enactment was neces- 
sitated by the iniquity of men which had in time ob- 
scured and partly effaced the letter of the law in their 
souls. 

Latterly God again spoke, but this time in the 
person of Jesus Christ. The Saviour, after confirm- 
ing the Decalogue with His authority, gave other 
laws to men concerning the Ciiurch He had founded 
and the means of applying to themselves the fruits of 
the Redemption. We give the name of dogma to 
what He tells us to believe and of morals to what we 
must do. These precepts of Jesus Christ are con^ 
tained in the Gospel, and are called the Evangelical 



26 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Law. It is made known to us by the infallible 
Church through which God speaks. 

Akin to these divine laws is the purely ecclesias- 
tical law or law of the Church. Christ sent forth 
His Church clothed with His own and His Father's 
authority. ''As the Father sent me, so I send you." 
She was to endure^, perfect herself and fulfil her 
mission on earth. To enable her to carry out this divine 
plan she makes laws, laws purely ecclesiastical, but 
laws that have the same binding force as the divine 
laws themselves, since they bear the stamp of divine 
authority. God willed the Church to be; He willed 
consequently all the necessary means without which 
she would cease to be. For Catholics, therefore, as 
far as obligations are concerned, there is no practical 
difference between God's law and the law of His 
Church. Jesus Christ is God. The Church is His 
spouse. To her the Saviour said: "He that heareth 
you, heareth me, and he that despiseth you despiseth 
Me." 

A breach of the law is a sin. A sin is a 
deliberate transgression of the Law of God. A sin 
may be committed in thought, in desire, in word, or 
in deed, and by omission as well as by commission. 

It is well to bear in mind that a thought, as well 
as a deed, is an act, may be a human and a moral act, 
and consequently may be a sin. Human laws may be 
violated only in deed ; but God, who is a sea-rcher of 
hearts, takes note of the workings of the will whence 
springs all malice. To desire to break His com- 
mandments is to ofifend Him as eflPectually as to break 
them in deed ; to relish in one's mind forbidden fruits, 
to meditate and deliberate on evil purposes, is only a 
degree removed from actual commission of wrong. 
Evil is perpetrated in the will, either by a longing to 
prevaricate or by affection for that which is prohib- 
ited. If the evil materializes exteriorly, it does not con- 
stitute one in sin anew, but only completes the malice 
already existing. Men judge their fellows by their 



THE LAW OF GOD AND ITS BREACH. 



27 



works; God judges us by our thoughts, by the inner 
workings of the soul, and takes notice of our exterior 
doings only in so far as they are related to the will. 
Therefore it is that an offense against Him, to be an 
offense, need not necessarily be perpetrated in word 
or in deed; it is sufficient that the will place itself in 
opposition to the Will of God, and adhere to what the 
Law forbids. 

Sin is not the same as vice. One is an act, the 
other is a state or inclination to act. One is transi- 
tory, the other is permanent. One can exist without 
the other. A drunkard is not always drunk, nor is 
a man a drunkard for having once or twice over- 
indulged. 

In only one case is vice less evil than sin, and 
that is when the inclination remains an unwilling in- 
clination and does not pass to acts. A man who re- 
forms after a protracted spree still retains an inclina- 
tion, a desire for strong drink. He is nowise criminal 
so long as he resists that tendency. 

But practically vice is worse than sin, for it sup- 
poses frequent wilful acts of sin of which it is the 
natural consequence, and leads to many grievous of- 
fenses. 

A vice is without sin when one struggles success- 
fully against it after the habit has been retracted. It 
may never be radically destroyed. There may be un- 
conscious, involuntary lapses under the constant 
pressure of a strong inclination, as in the vice of 
cursing, and it remains innocent as long as it is not 
wilfully yielded to and indulged. But to yield to the 
gratification of an evil desire or propensity, without 
constraint, is to doom oneself to the most prolific of 
evils and to lie under the curse of God. 



CHAPTER VI. 



SIN. 

If the Almighty had never imposed upon His 
creatures a Law, there would be no sin; we would 
be free to do as we please. But the presence of God's 
Law restrains our liberty, and it is by using, or rather 
abusing, our freedom, that we come to violate the 
Law. It is for this reason that Law is said to be 
opposed to Liberty. Liberty is a word of many 
meanings. Men swear by it and men juggle with it. 
It is the slogan in both camps of the world's warfare. 
It is in itself man's noblest inheritance, and yet there 
is no name under the sun in which more crimes are 
committed. 

By liberty as opposed to God's law we do not 
understand the power to do evil as well as good. That 
liberty is the glory of man, but the exercise of it, in 
the alternative of evil, is damnable, and debases the 
creature in the same proportions as the free choice of 
good ennobles him. That liberty the law leaves 
untouched. We never lose it; or rather, we may 
lose it partially when under physical restraint, but 
totally, only when deprived of our senses. The law 
respects it. It respects it in the highest degree when 
in an individual it curtails or destroys it for the 
protection of society. 

Liberty may also be the equal right to do good 
and evil. There are those who arrogate to themselves 
such liberty. No man ever possessed it, the law 
annihilated it forever. And although we have used 
the word in this sense, the fact is that no man has 
the right to do evil or ever will have, so long as God 
is God. These people talk much and loudly about 
freedom — the magic word! — assert with much pomp 
and verbosity the rights of man, proclaim his 



SIN. 



29 



independence, and are given to nuich like inane vaunt- 
ing and braggadocio. 

We may be free in many things, but where God 
is concerned and He commands, we are free only to 
obey. His will is supreme, and when it is asserted, we 
purely and simply have no choice to do as we list. 
This privilege is called license, not liberty. We ha<ve 
certain rights as men, but we have duties, too, as 
creatures, and it ill-becomes us to prate about our 
rights, or the duties of others towards us, while we 
ignore the obligations we are under towards others 
and our first duty which is to God. Our boasted 
independence consists precisely in this : that we owe to 
Him not only the origin of our nature, but even the 
very breath we draw, and which preserves our being, 
for ''in Him we live, move and have our being." 

The first prerogative of God towards us is 
authority or the right to command- Our first obliga- 
tion as well as our highest honor as creatures is to 
obey. And until we understand this sort of liberty, 
we live in a world of enigmas and know not the first 
letter of the alphabet of creation. We are not free 
to sin. 

Liberty rightly understood, true liberty of the 
children of God, is the right of choice within the law, 
the right to embrace what is good and to avoid what 
is evil. This policy no man can take from us ; and 
far from infringing upon this right, the law aids it to 
a fuller development. A person reading by candle- 
light would not complain that his vision was obscured 
if an arc light were substituted for the candle. A 
traveler who takes notice of the signposts along his 
way telling the direction and dista.nce, and pointing 
out pitfalls and dangers, would not consider his rights 
contested or his liberty restricted by these things. And 
the law, as it becomes more clearly known to us, 
defines exactly the sphere of our action and shows 
plainly where dangers lurk and evil is to be appre- 



30 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



hended. And we gladly avail ourselves of this infor- 
mation that enables us to walk straight and secure. 
The law becomes a godsend to our liberty, and 
obedience to it^ our salvation. 

He who goes beyond the bounds of true moral 
liberty, breaks the law of God and sins. He thereby 
refuses to God the obedience which to Him is due. 
Disobedience involves contempt of authority and of 
him who commands. Sin is therefore an offense 
against God, and that offense is proportionate to the 
dignity of the person offended. 

The sinner, by his act of disobedience, not only 
sets at naught the will of his Maker, but by the same 
act, in a greater or lesser degree, turns away from his 
appointed destiny; and in this he is imitated by noth- 
ing else in creation. Every other created thing obeys. 
The heavens follow their designated course. Beasts 
and birds and fish are intent upon one thing, and that 
is to work out the divine plan. Man alone sows dis- 
order and confusion therein. He shows irreverence 
for God's presence and contempt for His friendship; 
ingratitude for His goodness and supreme indifference 
for the penalty that follows his sin as surely as the 
shadow follows its object. So that, taken all in all, 
such a creature might fitly be said to be one part 
criminal and two parts fool. Folly and sin are 
synonymous in Holy Writ. "The fool saith in his 
heart there is no God." 

Sin is essentially an offense. But there is a dif- 
ference of degree between a slight and an outrage. 
There are direct offenses against God, such as the 
refusal to believe in Him or unbelief ; to hope in Him, 
or despair, etc. Indirect offenses attain Him through 
the neighbor or ourselves. 

All duties to neighbor or self are not equally 
imperious and to fail in them all is not equally evil. 
Then again, not all sins are committed through pure 
malice, that is, with complete knowledge and full con- 



SIN. 



31 



sent. Ignorance and weakness are factors to be con- 
sidered in our guilt, and detract from the malice of 
our sins. Hence two kinds of sin, mortal and venial. 

These mark the extremes of offense. One severs 
all relation of friendship, the other chills the existing 
friendship. By one, we incur God's infinite hatred, by 
the other, His displeasure. The penalty for one is 
eternal ; the other can be atoned for by suffering. 

It is not possible in all cases to tell exactly what 
is mortal and what venial in our offenses. There is 
a clean-cut distinction between the two, but the line 
of demarcation is not always discernible. There are, 
however, certain characteristics which enable us in 
the majority of cases to distinguish one from the 
other. 

First, the matter must be grievous in fact or in 
intention; that is, there must be a serious breach of 
the law of God or the law of conscience. Then, we 
must know perfectly well what we are doing and give 
it our full consent. It must therefore be a grave 
offense in all the plenitude of its malice. Of course, 
to act without sufficient reason, with a well-founded 
doubt as to the malice of the act, would be to violate 
the law of conscience and would constitute a mortal 
sin. There is no moral sin without the fulfilment of 
these conditions. All other offenses are venial. 

We cannot, of course, read the soul of anybody. 
If, however, we suppose knowledge and consent, there 
are certain sins that are always mortal. Such are 
blasphemy, luxury, heresy, etc. When these sins are 
deliberate, they are always mortal offenses. Others 
are usually mortal, such as a sin against justice. To 
steal is a sin against justice. It is frequently a 
mortal sin, but it may happen that the amount taken 
be slight, in which case the offense ceases to be mortal. 

Likewise, certain sins are usually venial, but in 
certain circumstances a venial sin may take on such 
malice as to be constituted mortal. 



32 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Our conscience, under God, is the best judge of 
our malevolence and consequently of our guilt. 



CHAPTER VII. 
HOW TO COUNT SINS. 

The number of sins a person may commit is well- 
nigh incalculable, which is only one way of saying 
that the malice of man has invented innumerable 
means of offending the Almighty — a compliment to our 
ingenuity and the refinement of our natural perver- 
sity. It is not always pleasant to know, and few- 
people try very hard to learn, of what kind and how 
many are their daily offenses. This knowledge re- 
veals too nakedly our wickedness which we prefer to 
ignore. Catholics, however, who believe in the neces- 
sity of confession of sins, take a different view of 
the matter. The requirements of a good confession 
are such as can be met only by those who know in 
what things they have sinned and how often. 

There are many different kinds of sin. It is 
possible by a single act to commit more than one 
sin. And a given sin may be repeated any number 
of times. 

To get the exact number of our misdeeds we 
must begin by counting as many sins at least as there 
are kinds of sin. We might say there is an offense 
for every time a commandment or precept is violated, 
for sin is a transgression of the law. But this would 
be insufificient inasmuch as the law may command 
or forbid more than one thing. 

Let the first commandment serve as an example. 
It is broken by sins against faith, or unbelief, against 
hope, or despair, against charity, against religion, etc. 
All these offenses are specifically different, that is, are 



HOW TO COUNT SINS. 



33 



different kinds of sin; yet but one precept is trans- 
gressed. Since therefore each commandment pre- 
scribes the practice of certain virtues, the first rule 
is that there is a sin for every virtue violated. 

But this is far from exhausting our capacity for 
evil. Our virtue may impose different obligations, so 
that against it alone we may offend in many 
different ways. Among the virtues prescribed 
by the first commandment is that of religion, 
which concerns the exterior homage due to God. I 
may worship false gods, thus offending against the 
virtue of religion, and commit a sin of idolatry. If 
I offer false homage to the true God, I also violate 
the virtue of religion, but commit a sin specifically 
different, a sin of superstition. Thus these different 
offenses are against but one of several virtues en- 
joined by one commandment. The virtue of charity 
is also prolific of obligations ; the virtue of chastity 
even more so. One act against the latter may con- 
tain a four-fold malice. 

It would be out of place here to adduce more 
examples : a detailed treatment of the virtues and 
commandments will make things clearer. For the 
moment it is necessary and sufficient to know that a 
commandment may prescribe many virtues, a virtue 
may impose many obligations, and there is a specifi- 
cally different sin for each obligation violated. 

But we can go much farther than this in wrong- 
doing, and must count one sin every time the act is 
committed. 

"Yes, but how are we to know when there is one 
act or more than one act! An act may be of long 
or short duration. How many sins do I commit if 
the act lasts, say, two hours? And how can I tell 
where one act ends and the other begins ?" 

In an action which endures an hour or two hours, 
there may be one and there may be a dozen acts. When 
the matter a sinner is working on is a certain, specified 
evil, the extent to which he prevaricates numerically 



34 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



depends upon the action of the will. A fellow who 
enters upon the task of slaying his neighbor can kill 
but once in fact ; but he can commit the sin of murder 
in his soul once or a dozen times. It depends on the 
will. Sin is a deliberate transgression, that is, first of 
all an act of the will. If he resolves once to kill and 
never retracts till the deed of blood is done, he sins 
but once. If he disavows his resolution and after- 
wards resolves anew, he repeats the sin of murder 
in his soul as often as he goes through this process 
of will action. This sincere retraction of a deed is 
called moral interruption and it has the mysterious 
power of multiplying sins. 

Not every interruption is a moral one. To put the 
matter aside for a certain while in the hope of a better 
opportunity, for the procuring of necessary facilities 
or for any other reason, with the unshaken pur- 
pose of pursuing the course entered upon, is to sus- 
pend action; but this action is wholly exterior, and 
does not affect the will. The act of the will perseveres, 
never loses its force, so there is no moral, but only a 
physical, interruption. There is no renewal of consent 
for it has never been withdrawn. The one moral act 
goes on, and but one sin is committed. 

Thus, of two wretches on the same errand of 
crime, one may sin but once, while the other is guilty 
of the same sin a number of times. But the several 
sins last no longer than the one. Which is the more 
guilty ? That is a question for God to decide ; He does 
the judging, we do the counting. 

This possible multiplication of sin where a single 
act is apparent emphasizes the fact that evil and good 
proceed from the will. It is by the will primarily and 
essentially that we serve or offend God, and, absolutely 
speaking, no exterior deed is necessary for the 
accomplishment of this end. 

The exterior deed of sin always supposes a 
natural preparation of sin — thought, desires, resolu- 



HOW TO COUNT SINS. 



35 



tion, — which precede or accompany the deed, and 
without which there would be no sin. It is sinful only 
inasmuch as it is related to the will^ and is the fruit 
thereof. The interior act constitutes the sin in its being ; 
the exterior act constitutes it in its completeness. 

All of which leads up to the conclusion, of a 
nature perhaps to surprise some, that to resolve to sin 
and to commit the sin in deed are not two different 
sins, but one complete sin, in all the fulness of its 
malice. True, the exterior act may give rise to 
scandal, and from it may devolve upon us obligations 
of justice, the reparation of injury done; true, with 
the exterior complement the sin may be more grievous. 
But there cannot be several sins if there be one single 
uninterrupted act of the will. 

An evil thing is proposed to your mind ; you enjoy 
the thought of doing it, knowing it to be wrong ; you 
desire to do it and resolve to do it ; you take the natural 
means of doing it; you succeed and consummate the 
evil — a long drawn out and well prepared deed, 'tis 
true, but only one sin. The injustices, the scandal, the 
sins you might commit incidentally, which do not 
pertain naturally to the deed, all these are another 
matter, and are other kinds of sins ; but the act itself 
stands alone, complete and one. 

But these interior acts of sin, whether or not they 
have reference to external completion, must be sinful. 
The first stage is the suggestion of the imagination 
or simple seeing of the evil in the mind, which is not 
sinful ; the next is the moving of the sensibility or the 
purely animal pleasure experienced, in which there is 
no evil, either ; for we have no sure mastery over these 
faculties. From the imagination and sensibility the 
temptation passes before the will for consent. If con- 
sent is denied, there is no deadly malice or guilt, no 
matter how long the previous effects may have 
been endured. No thought is a sin unless it be fully 
consented to. 



CHAPTER VIII. 



CAPITAL SINS. 

You can never cure a disease till you get at the 
seat or root of the evil. It will not do to attack the 
several manifestations that appear on the surface, the 
aches and pains and attendant disorders. You must 
attack the affected organ, cut out the root of the evil 
growth, and kill the obnoxious germ. There is no 
other permanent remedy; until this is done, all relief 
is but temporary. 

And if we desire to remove the distemper of sin, 
similarly it is necessary to seek out the root of all sin. 
We can lay our finger on it at once ; it is inordinate 
self-love. 

Ask yourself why you broke this or that com- 
mandment. It is because it forbade you a satisfaction 
that you coveted, a satisfaction that your self-love 
imperiously demanded ; or it is because it prescribed an 
act that cost an effort, and you loved yourself too 
much to make that effort. Examine every failing, 
little or great, and you will trace them back to the 
same source. If we thought more of God and less of 
ourselves we would never sin. The sinner lives for 
himself first, and for God afterwards. 

Strange that such a sacred thing as love, the 
source of all good, may thus, by abuse, become the 
fountainhead of all evil! Perhaps, if it were not so 
sacred and prolific of good, its excess would not be so 
unholy. But the higher 3^ou stand when you tumble, 
the greater the fall; so the better a thing is in itself, 
the more abominable is its abuse. Love directed 
aright, towards God first, is the fulfilment of the Law ; 
love misdirected is the very destruction of all law. 



CAPITAL SINS. 



37 



Yet it is u©t wrong to love oneself; that is the 
first law of nature. One, and one only being, the 
Maker, are we bound to love more than ourselves. 
The neighbor is to be loved as ourselves. And if our 
just interests conflict with his, if our rights and his 
are opposed to each other, there is no legitimate means 
but we may employ to obtain or secure what is rightly 
ours. The evil of self-love lies in its abuse and excess, 
in that it goes beyond the limits set by God and nature, 
that it puts unjustly our interests before God's and the 
neighbor's, and that to self it sacrifices them and all 
that pertains to them. Self, the ''ego," is the idol 
before which all must bow. 

Self-love, on an evil day, in the garden of Eden, 
wedded sin, Satan himself officiating under the dis- 
guise of a serpent; and she gave birth to seven 
daughters like unto herself, who in turn became fruit- 
ful mothers of iniquity. Haughty Pride, first-born 
and queen among her sisters, is inordinate love of one's 
w^orth and excellence, talents and beauty ; sordid 
Avarice or Covetousness is excessive love of riches ; 
loathsome Lust is the third, and loves carnal pleasures 
without regard for the law ; fiery Anger, a counterpart 
of pride, is love rejected but seeking blindly to remedy 
the loss ; bestial Gluttony worships the stomach ; green- 
eyed Envy is hate for wealth and happiness denied ; 
finally Sloth loves bodily ease and comfort to excess. 
The infamous brood ! These parents of all iniquity are 
called the seven capital sins. They assume the leader- 
ship of evil in the world and are the seven arms of 
Satan. 

As it becomes their dignity, these vices never 
walk alone or go unattended, and that is the desperate 
feature of their malice. Each has a cortege of pas- 
sions, a whole train of inferior minions, that accom- 
pany or follow. Once entrance gained and a free 
hand given, there is no telling the result. Once seated 
and secure, the passion seeks to satisfy itself ; that is 
its business. Certain means are required to this end. 



38 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



and these means can be procured only by sinning. 
Obstacles often stand in the way and new sins furnish 
steps to vault over, or implements to batter them 
down. Intricate and difficult conditions frequently 
arise as the result of self-indulgence, out of which 
there is no exit but by fresh sins. Hence the long 
train of crimes led by one capital sin towards the goal 
of its satisfaction, and hence the havoc wrought by its 
untrammeled working in a human soul. 

This may seem exaggerated to some; others it 
may mislead as to the true nature of the capital sins, 
unless it be clearly put forth in what their malice con- 
sists. Capital sins ^re not, in the first place, in them- 
selves, sins ; they are vices, passions, inclinations or 
tendencies to sin, and we know that a vice is not 
necessarily sinful. Our first parents bequeathed to 
us as an inheritance these germs of misery and sin. 
We are all in a greater or lesser degree prone to 
excess and to desire unlawful pleasures. Yet, for 
all that, we do not of necessity sin. We sin when 
we yield to these tendencies and do what they suggest. 
The simple proneness to evil, devoid of all wilful 
yielding is therefore not wrong. Why? Because 
we cannot help it ; that is a good and sufficient reason. 

These passions may lie dormant in our nature 
without soliciting to evil ; they may, at any moment, 
awake to action with or without provocation. The 
sight of an enemy or the thought of a wrong may 
stir up anger; pride may be aroused by flattery, 
applause or even compliments ; the demon of lust may 
make its presence known and felt for a good reason, 
for a slight reason, or for no reason at all ; gluttony 
shows its head at the sight of food or drink, etc. 

He who deliberately and without reason arouses 
a passion, and thus exposes himself imprudently to 
an assault of concupiscence, is grievously guilty; for 
it is to trifle with a powerful and dangerous enemy 
and it betokens indiflference to the soul's salvation. 



CAPITAL SINS. 



39 



Suggestions, seductions, allurements follow upon 
the awakening of these passions. When the array of 
these forces comes in contact with the will, the struggle 
is on; it is called temptation. Warfare is the natural 
state of man on earth. Without it, the world here 
below would be a paradise, but life would be without 
merit. 

In this unprovoked and righteous battle with sin, 
the only evil to be apprehended is the danger of 
yielding. But far from being sinful, the greater the 
danger, the more meritorious the struggle. It matters 
not what we experience while fighting the enemy. 
Imagination and sensation that solicit to yielding, 
anxiety of mind and discouragement, to all this there 
is no wrong attached, but merit. 

Right or wrong depends on the outcome. Every 
struggle ends in victory or defeat for one party and 
in temptation there is sin only in defeat. A single 
act of the will decides. It matters not how long the 
struggle lasts ; if the will does not capitulate, there is 
no sin. 

This resistance demands plenty of energy, a soul 
inured to like combats and an ample provision of 
weapons of defense — faith, hatred of sin, love of God. 
Prayer is essential. Flight is the safest means, but 
is not always possible. Humility and self-denial are 
an excellent, even necessary, preparation for assured 
victory. 

No man need expect to make himself proof 
against temptation. It is not a sign of weakness; or 
if so, it is a weakness common to all men. There is 
weakness only in defeat, and cowardice as well. The 
gallant and strong are they who fight manfully. 
Manful resistance means victory, and victory makes 
one stronger and invincible, while defeat at every 
repetition places victory farther and farther beyond 
our reach. 



40 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Success requires more than strength, it requires 
wisdom, the wisdom to single out the particular 
passion that predominates in us, to study its artifices 
and by remote preparation to make ourselves secure 
against its assaults. The leader thus exposed and its 
power for evil reduced to a minimum, it will be 
comparatively easy to hold in check all other dependent 
passions. 



CHAPTER IX. 
PRIDE. 

Excellence is a quality that raises a man above 
the common level and distinguishes him among his 
fellow-beings. The term is relative. The quality may 
exist in any degree or measure. 'Tis only the few 
that excel eminently ; but anyone may be said to excel 
who is, ever so little, superior to others, be they few 
or many. Three kinds of advantages go to make 
up one's excellence. Nature's gifts are talent, knowl- 
edge, health, strength, and beauty ; fortune endows 
us with honor, wealth, authority; and virtue, piety, 
honesty are the blessings of grace. To the possession 
of one or several of these advantages excellence is 
attached. 

All good is made to be loved. All gifts directly 
or indirectly from God are good, and if excellence is 
the fruit of these gifts, it is lawful, reasonable, human 
to love it and them. But measure is to be observed 
in all things. Virtue is righteously equidistant, while 
vice goes to extremes. It is not, therefore, attachment 
and affection for this excellence, but inordinate, 
unreasonable love that is damnable, and constitutes the 
vice of pride. 



PRIDE. 



41 



God alone is excellent and all greatness is from 
Him alone. And those who are born great, who acquire 
greatness, or who have greatness thrust upon them, 
alike owe their superiority to Him. Nor are these 
advantages and this preeminence due to our merits 
and deserts. Everything that comes to us from God 
is purely gratuitous on His part, and undeserved on 
ours. Since our very existence is the effect of a 
free act of His will, why should not, for a greater 
reason, all that is accidental to that existence be 
dependent on His free choice? Finally, nothing of all 
this is ours or ever can become ours. Our qualities 
are a pure loan confided to our care for a good and 
useful purpose, and will be reclaimed with interest. 

Since the malice of our pride consists in the 
measure of affection we bestow upon our excellence, 
if we love it to the extent of adjudging it not a gift 
of God, but the fruit of our own better selves ; or if 
we look upon it as the result of our worth, that is, 
due to our merits, we are guilty of nothing short of 
downright heresy, because we hold two doctrines 
contrary to faith. "What hast thou, that thou hast 
not received ?" If a gift is due to us, it is no longer a 
gift. This extreme of pride is happily rare. It is 
directly opposed to God. It is the sin of Lucifer. 

A lesser degree of pride is, while admitting our- 
selves beholden to God for whatever we possess and 
confessing His bounties to be undeserved, to consider 
the latter as becoming ours by right of possession, 
with liberty to make the most of them for our own 
personal ends. This is a false and sinful appreciation 
of God's gifts, but it respects His and all subordinate 
authority. If it never, in practice, fails in this 
submission, there is sin, because the plan of God, by 
which all things must be referred to Him, is thwarted ; 
but its malice is not considered grievous. Pride, 
however, only too often fails in this, its tendency being 
to satisfy itsdf, which it cannot do within the bounds 



42 



MORAL BRIEFS 



of authority. Therefore it is that from being a venial, 
this species of pride becomes a mortal offense, because 
it leads almost infallibly to disobedience and rebellion. 

There is a pride, improperly so called, which is in 
accordance with all the rules of order, reason and 
honor. It is a sense of responsibility and dignity 
which every man owes to himself, and which is 
compatible with the most sincere humility. It is a 
regard, an esteem for oneself, too great to allow one 
to stoop to anything base or mean. It is submissive 
to authority, acknowledges shortcomings, respects 
others and expects to be respected in return. It can 
preside with dignity, and obey with docility. Far 
from being a vice, it is a virtue and is only too rare 
in this world. It is nobility of soul which betrays 
itself in self-respect. 

Here is the origin, progress and development of 
the vice. We first consider the good that is in us, and 
there is good in all of us, more or less. This 
consideration becomes first exaggerated ; then one-sided 
by reason of our overlooking and ignoring imperfec-. 
tions and shortcomings. Out of these reflections arises 
an apprehension of excellence or superiority greater 
than we really possess. From the mind this estimate 
passes to the heart which embraces it fondly, rejoices 
and exults. The conjoint acceptation of this false 
appreciation by the mind and heart is the first complete 
stage of pride — an overwrought esteem of self. The 
next move is to become self-sufficient, presumptuous. 
A spirit of enterprise asserts itself, wholly out of 
keeping with the means at hand. It is sometimes 
foolish, sometimes insane, reason being blinded by 
error. 

The vice then seeks to satisfy itself, craves for the 
esteem of others, admiration, flattery, applause, and 
glory. This is vanity, different from conceit only in 
this, that the former is based on something that is, 
or has been done, while the latter is based on nothingf. 



PRIDE. 43 

Vanity manifested in word is called boasting ; in deed 
that is true, vain-glory; in deed without foundation 
of truth, hypocrisy. 

But this is not substantial enough for ambition, 
another form of pride. It covets exterior marks of 
appreciation, rank, honor, dignity, authority. It seeks 
to rise, by hook or crook, for the sole reason of showing 
off and displaying self. Still growing apace, pride 
becomes indignant, irritated, angry if this due 
appreciation is not shown to its excellence ; it despises 
others either for antipathy or inferiority. It believes 
its own judgment infallible and, if in the wrong, will 
never acknowledge a mistake or yield. Finally the 
proud man becomes so full of self that obedience 
is beneath him, and he no longer respects authority 
of man or of God. Here we have the sin of pride in 
all the plenitude of its malice. 

Pride is often called an honorable vice, because 
its aspirations are lofty, because it supposes strength, 
and tends directly to elevate man, rather than to debase 
and degrade him, like the other vices. Yet pride is 
compatible with every meanness. It lodges in the 
heart of the pauper as well as in that of the prince. 
There is nothing contemptible that it will not do to 
satisfy itself; and although its prime malice is to 
oppose God it has every quality to make it as hideous 
as Satan himself. It goeth before a fall, but it does 
not cease to exist after the fall ; and no matter how 
deep down in the mire of iniquity you search, you 
will find pride nethermost. Other vices excite one's 
pity ; pride makes us shudder. 



CHAPTER X. 



COVETOUSNESS. 

"What is a miser?" asked the teacher of her 
pupils, and the bright boy spoke up and answered: 
one who has a greed for gold. But he and all the class 
were embarrassed as to how this greed for gold 
should be qualified. The boy at the foot of the class 
came to the rescue, and shouted out : misery. 

Less wise answers are made every day in our 
schools. Misery is indeed the lot, if not the vice, cf 
the miser. 'Tis true that this is one of the few vices 
that arrive at permanent advantages, the others 
offering satisfaction that lasts but for a moment, and 
leaves nothing but bitterness behind. Yet, the more 
the miser possesses the more insatiable his greed 
becomes, and the less his enjoyment, by reason of the 
redoubled efforts he makes to have and to hold. 

But the miser is not the only one infected with 
the sin of avarice. His is not an ordinary, but an 
extreme case. He is the incarnation of the evil. He 
believes in, hopes in, and loves gold above all things ; 
he prays and sacrifices to it. Gold is his god, and 
gold will be his reward, a miserable one. 

This degree of the vice is rare ; or, at least, is 
rarely suflFered to manifest itself to this extent; and 
although scarcely a man can be found to confess to 
this failing, because it is universally regarded as most 
loathsome and repulsive, still few there are who are 
not more or less slaves to cupidity. Pride is the sin 
of the angels ; lust is the sin of the brute, and avarice 
is the sin of man. Scripture calls it the universal 
evil. We are more prone to inveigh against it, and 
accuse others of the vice than to admit it in ourselves. 



COVETOUSNESS. 



45 



Sometimes, it is "the pot calling the kettle black;'* 
more often it is a clear case of "sour grapes." Disdain 
for the dollars "that speak," "the mighty dollars," in 
abundance and in superabundance, is rarely genuine. 

There are, concerning the passion of covetousness, 
two notions as common as they are false. It is thought 
that this vice is peculiar to the rich, and is not to be 
met with among the poor. Now, avarice does not 
necessarily suppose the possession of wealth, and does 
not consist in the possession, but in the inordinate 
desire, or greed for, or the lust of, riches. It may 
be, and is, difficult for one to possess much wealth 
without setting one's heart on it. But it is also true 
that this greed may possess one who has little or 
nothing. It may be found in unrestrained excess 
under the rags of the pauper and beggar. They who 
aspire to, or desire, riches with avidity are covetous 
whether they have much, little, or nothing. Christ 
promised His kingdom to the poor in spirit, not to the 
poor in fact. Spiritual poverty can associate with 
abundant wealth, just as the most depraved cupidity 
may exist in poverty. 

Another prejudice, favorable to ourselves, is that 
only misers are covetous, because they love money 
for itself and deprive themselves of the necessaries 
of life to pile it up. But it is not necessary that the 
diagnosis reveal these alarming symptoms to be sure 
of having a real case of cupidity. They are covetous 
who strive after wealth with passion. Various 
motives may arouse this passion, and although they 
may increase the malice, they do not alter the nature, 
of the vice. Some covet wealth for the sake of 
possessing it ; others, to procure pleasures or to satisfy 
different passions. Avarice it continues to be, what- 
ever the motive. Not even prodigality, the lavish 
spending of riches, is a token of the absence of 
cupidity. Rapacity may stand behind extravagance to 
keep the supply inexhausted. 



46 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



It is covetousness to place one's greatest happiness 
in the possession of wealthy or to consider its loss 
or privation the greatest of misfortunes; in other 
words, to over-rejoice in having and to over-grieve 
in not having. 

It is covetousness to be so disposed as to acquire 
riches unjustly rather than suffer poverty. 

It is covetousness to hold, or give begi'udgingly, 
when charity presses her demands 

There is, in these cases, a degree of malice that 
is ordinarily mortal, because the law of God and of 
nature is not respected. 

It is the nature of this vice to cause unhappiness 
which increases until it becomes positive wretchedness 
in the miser. Anxiety of mind is followed by 
hardening of the heart; then injustice in desire and 
in fact ; blinding of the conscience, ending in a general 
stultification of man before the god Mammon. 

All desires of riches and comfort are not, therefore, 
avarice. One may aspire to, and seek wealth without 
avidity. This ambition is a laudable one, for it does 
not exaggerate the value of the world's goods, would 
not resort to injustice, and has not the characteristic 
tenacity of covetousness. There is order in this desire 
for plenty. It is the great mover of activity in life; 
it is good because it is natural, and honorable because 
of its motives. 



CHAPTER XI. 



LUST. 

Pride resides principally in the mind, an<^ thence 
sways over the entire man ; avarice proceeds from 
the heart and affections ; lust has its seat in the flesh. 
By pride man prevaricating imitates the angel of whose 
nature he partakes ; avarice is proper to man as being 
a composite of angelic and animal natures ; lust is 
characteristic of the brute pure and simple. This 
trinity of concupiscence is in direct opposition to the 
Trinity of God — to the Father, whose authority pride 
would destroy ; to the Son, whose voluntary stripping 
of the divinity and the poverty of whose life avarice 
scorns and contemns ; to the Holy Ghost, to whom lust 
is opposed as the flesh is opposed to the spirit. This 
is the mighty trio that takes possession of the v^^hole 
being of man, controls his superior and inferior 
appetites, and wars on the whole being of God. And 
lust is the most ignoble of the three. 

Strictly speaking, it is not here question of the 
commandments. They prescribe or forbid acts of sin 
— thoughts, words or deeds ; lust is a passion, a vice or 
inclination, a concupiscence. It is not an act. It does 
not become a sin while it remains in this state of pure 
inclination. It is inbred in our nature as children of 
Adam. Lust is an appetite like any other appetite, 
conformable to our human nature, and can be satisfied 
lawfully within the order established by God and 
nature. But it is vitiated by the corruption of fallen 
flesh. This vitiated appetite craves for unlawful and 
forbidden satisfactions and pleasures, such as are not 
in keeping with the plans of the Creator. Thus the 



48 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



vitiated appetite becomes inordinate. At one and the 
same time^ it becomes inordinate and sinful, the 
passion being gratified unduly by a positive act of 
sin. 

This depraved inclination, as everyone knows, 
may be in us, v^ithout being of us, that is, without any 
guilt being imputed to us. This occurs in the event 
of a violent assault of passion, in which our will has 
no part, and which consequently does not materialize, 
exteriorly or interiorly, in a human act forbidden by 
the laws of morality. Nor is there a transgression, 
even when gratified, if reason and faith control the 
inclination and direct it along the lines laid down by 
the divine and natural laws. Outside of this^ ail 
manners, shapes and forms of lust are grievous sins, 
for the law admits no levity of matter. No further 
investigation, at the present time, into the essence of 
this vice is necessary. 

There is an abominable theory familiar to, and 
held by the dissolute, who, not content with spreading 
the contagion of their souls, aim at poisoning the very 
wells of morality. They reason somewhat after this 
fa:shion : Human nature is everywhere the same. He 
knows others who best knows himself. A mere glance 
at themselves reveals the fact that they are chained 
fast to earth by their vile appetites, and that to break 
these chains is a task too heavy for them to undertake. 
The fact is overlooked that these bonds are of their 
own creation, and that every end is beyond reach of 
him who refuses to take the means to that end. 
Incapable, too, of conceiving a sphere of morality 
superior to that in which they move, and without 
further investigation of facts to make their induction 
good, they conclude that all men are like themselves ; 
that open profession of morality is unadulterated 
hypocrisy, that a pure man is a living lie. A more 
wholesale impeachment of human veracity and a 
more brutal indignity offered to human nature could 



LUST. 



49 



scarcely be imagined. Reason never argued thus ; the 
heart has reasons which the reason cannot comprehend. 
Truth to be loved needs only to be seen. Adversely, 
it is the case with falsehood. 

It is habitual with this passion to hide its 
hideousness under the disguise of love, and thus this 
most sacred and hallowed name is prostituted to 
signify that which is most vile and loathsome. 
Depravity? No. Goodness of heart, generosity of 
affections, the very quintessence of good nature ! But 
God is love, and love that does not see the image 
of the Creator in its object is not love, but the brutal 
instinct. 

There are some who do not go so far as to 
identify vice with virtue, but content themselves with 
esteeming that, since passion is so strong, virtue so 
difficult and God so merciful to His frail creatures, 
to yield a trifle is less a sin than a confession of 
native weakness. This ''weakness" runs a whole gamut 
of euphemisms ; imperfections, foibles, frailties, 
mistakes, miseries, accidents, indiscretions — anything 
to gloss it over, anything but what it is. At this rate, 
you could efface the whole Decalogue and at one fell 
stroke destroy all laws, human and divine. What is 
yielding to any passion but weakness? Very few 
sins are sins of pure malice. If one is weak through 
one's own fault, and chooses to remain so rather than 
take the necessary means of acquiring strength, that 
one is responsible in full for the weakness. The weak 
and naughty in this matter are plain, ordinary sinners 
of a very sable dye. 

Theirs is not the view that God took of things 
when He purged the earth with water and destroyed 
the five cities with fire. From Genesis to the Apocalypse 
you will not find a weakness against which He inveighs 
so strongly, and chastises so severely. He forbids and 
condemns every deliberate yielding, every voluntary 
step taken over the threshold of moral cleanness in 
thought, wordj desire or action. 



50 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



The gravity and malice of sin is not to be 
measured by the fancies, opinions, theories or attitude 
of men. The first and only rule is the will of God 
which is sufficiently clear to anyone who scans the 
sacred pages whereon it is manifested. And the 
reason of His uncompromising hostility to voluptuous- 
ness can be found in the intrinsic malice of the evil. 
In man, as God created him, the soul is superior to the 
body, and of its nature should rule and govern. Lust 
inverts this order, and the flesh lords it over the spirit. 
The image of God is defiled, dragged in the mire of 
filth and corruption, and robbed of its spiritual nature, 
as far as the thing is possible. It becomes corporal, 
carnal, animal. And thus the superior soul with its 
sublime faculties of intelligence and will is made to 
obey under the tyranny of emancipated flesh, and Hke 
the brute seeks only for things carnal. 

It is impossible to say to what this vice will not 
lead, or to enumerate the crimes that follow in its 
wake. The first and most natural consequence is to 
create a distaste and aversion for prayer, piety, 
devotion, religion and God; and this is God's most 
terrible curse on the vice, for it puts beyond reach 
of the unfortunate sinner the only remedy that could 
save him. 

But if God's justice is so rigorous toward the 
wanton, His mercy is never so great as toward those 
who need it most, who desire it and ask it. The most 
touching episodes in the Gospels are those in which 
Christ opened wide the arms of His charity to sinful 
but repentant creatures, and lifted them out of their 
iniquity. That same charity and power to shrive, 
uplift and strengthen resides to-day, in all its 
plenitude, in the Church which is the continuation of 
Christ. Where there is a will there is a way. The 
will is the sinner's ; the way is in prayer and the 
sacraments. 



CHAPTER XII. 



ANGER. 

Never say, when you are angry, that you are 
mad ; it makes you appear much worse than you really 
are, for only dogs get mad. The rabies in a human 
being is a most unnatural and ignoble thing. Yet 
common parlance likens anger to it. 

It is safe to say that no one has yet been born 
that never yielded, more or less, to the sway of this 
passion. Everybody gets angry. The child sulks, the 
little girl calls names and makes faces, the boy fights 
and throws stones ; the maiden waxes huffy, spiteful, 
and won't speak, and the irascible male fumes, rages, 
and says and does things that become him not in the 
least. Even pious folks have their tiffs and tilts. All 
flesh is frail, and anger has an easy time of it; not 
because this passion is so powerful, but because it is 
insidious and passes for a harmless little thing in its 
ordinary disguise. And yet all wrath does not manifest 
itself thus exteriorly. Still waters are deepest. An 
imperturbable countenance may mask a very inferno 
of wrath and hatred. 

To hear us talk, there is no fault in all this, the 
greater part of the time. It is a soothing tonic to our 
conscience after a fit of rage, to lay all the blame on 
a defect of character or a naturally bad temper. If 
fault there is, it is anybody's but our own. We recall 
the fact that patience is a virtue that has its limits, and 
mention things that we solemnly aver would try the 
enduring powers of the beatified on their thrones in 
heaven. Some, at a loss otherwise to account for it, 
protest that a particular devil got hold of them and 
made resistance impossible. 



52 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



But it was not a devil at all. It was a little 
volcano, or better, a little powder magazine hidden 
away somewhere in the heart. The imp Pride had its 
head out looking for a caress, when it received a rebuff 
instead. Hastily disappearing within, it spat fire right 
and left, and the explosion followed, proportionate 
in energy and destructive power to the quantity of 
pent-up self-love that served as a charge. Once the 
mine is fired, in the confusion and disorder that follow, 
vengeance stalks forth in quest of the miscreant that 
did the wrong. 

Anger is the result of hurt pride, of injured self- 
love. It is a violent and inordinate commotion of 
the soul that seeks to wreak vengeance for an injury 
done. The causes that arouse anger vary infinitely 
in reasonableness, and there are all degrees of 
intensity. 

The malice of anger consists wholly in the 
measure of our deliberate yielding to its promptings. 
Sin, here as elsewhere, supposes an act of the will, 
A crazy man is not responsible for his deeds ; nor is 
anyone, for more than what he does knowingly. 

The first movement or emotion of irascibility is 
usually exempt of all fault; by this is meant the play 
of the passion on the sensitive part of our nature, the 
sharp, sudden fit that is not foreseen and is not within 
our control, the first effects of the rising wrath, such 
as the rush of blood, the trouble and disorder of the 
arffections, surexcitation and solicitation to revenge. A 
person used to repelling these assaults may be taken 
unawares and carried away to a certain extent in the 
first storm of passion, in this there is nothing sinful. 
But the same faultlessness could not be ascribed to him 
who exercises no restraining power over his failing, 
and by yielding habitually fosters it and must shoulder 
the responsibility of every excess. We incur the 
burden of God's wrath when, through our fault, 
negligence or a positive act of the will, we suffer this 



ANGER. 



53 



passion to steal away our reason, blind us to the value 
of our actions, and make us deaf to all considerations. 
No motive can justify such ignoble v^cakness that 
would lower us to the level of the madman. He 
dishonors his Maker who throws the reins to his 
animal instincts and allows them to gallop ahead with 
him, in a mad career of vengeance and destruction. 

Many do not go to this extent of fury, but give 
vent to their spleen in a more cool and calculating 
manner. Their temper, for being less fiery, is more 
bitter. They are choleric rather than bellicose. They 
do not fly to acts but to desires and well-laid plans of 
revenge. If the desire or deed lead to a violation of 
justice or charity, to scandal or any notable evil 
consequence, the sin is clearly mortal ; the more so, if 
this inward brooding be of long duration, as it betrays 
a more deep-seated malice. 

Are there any motives capable of justifying these 
outbursts of passion ? None at all, if our ire has these 
two features of unreasonableness and vindictiveness. 
This is evil. No motive, however good, can justify 
an evil end. 

If any cause were plausible, it would be a grave 
injury, malicious and unjust. But not even this is 
sufficient, for we are forbidden to return evil for evil. 
It may cause us grief and pain, but should not incite 
us to anger, hatred and revenge. What poor excuses 
would therefore be accidental or slight injuries, just 
penalties for our wrongdoings and imaginary 
grievances ! The less excusable is our wrath, the more 
serious is our delinquency. Our guilt is double-dyed 
when the deed and the cause of the deed are both alike 
unreasonable. 

Yet there is a kind of anger that is righteous. 
We speak of the wrath of God, and in God there can 
be no sin. Christ himself was angry at the sight of 
the vendors in the temple. Holy Writ says: Be ye 
angry and sin not. But this passion, which is the 



54 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



fruit of zeaL has three features which make it 
impossible to confound it with the other. It is always 
kept within the bounds of a wise moderation and under 
the empire of reason; it knows not the spirit of 
revenge; and it has behind it the best of motives, 
namely, zeal for the glory of God. It is aroused at the 
sight of excesses, injustices, scandals, frauds; it seeks 
to destroy sin, and to correct the sinner. It 
is often not only a privilege, but a duty. 
It supposes, naturally, judgment, prudence, and 
discretion, and excludes all selfish motives. 

Zeal in an inferior and more common degree is 
called indignation, and is directed against all things 
unworthy, low and deserving of contempt. It respects 
persons, but loathes whatever of sin or vice that is 
in, or comes from, unworthy beings. It is a virtue, 
and is the effect of a high sense of respectability. 

Impatience is not anger, but a feeling somewhat 
akin to it, provoked by untoward events and inevitable 
happenings, such as the weather, accidents, etc. It 
is void of all spirit of revenge. Peevishness is chronic 
impatience, due to a disordered nervous system and 
requires the services of a competent physician, being 
a physical, not a* moral, distemper. 

Anger is a weakness and betrays many other 
weaknesses ; that is why sensible people never allow 
this passion to sway them. It is the last argument 
of a lost cause: "You are angry, therefore you are 
wrong." The great misery of it is that hot-tempered 
people consider their mouths to be safety-valves, while 
the truth is that the wagging tongue generates bile 
faster than the open mouth can give exit to it. St. 
Liguori presented an irate scold with a bottle, the 
contents to be taken by the mouthful and held for 
fifteen minutes, each time her lord and master returned 
home in his cups. She used it with surprising results 
and went back for more. The saint told her to go to 
the well and draw^ inexhaustibly until cured. 



ANGER. 55 

For all others, the remedy is to be found in a 
meditation of these words of the "Our Father:" 
"forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who 
trespass against us." The Almighty will take us at 
our word. 



CHAPTER XIII. 
GLUTTONY. 

Self-preservation is nature's first law^ and the 
first and essential means of preserving one's existence 
is the taking of food and drink sufficient to nourish 
the body, sustain its strength and repair the forces 
thereof weakened by labor, fatigue or illness. God, ais 
well as nature, obliges us to care for our bodily health, 
in order that the spirit within may work out on earth 
the end of its being. 

Being purely animal, this necessity is not the 
noblest and most elevating characteristic of our nature. 
Nor is it, in its imperious and unrelenting require- 
ments, far removed from a species of tyranny. A 
kind Providence, however, by lending taste, savor and 
delectability to our aliments, makes us find pleasure 
in what otherwise would be repugnant and 
insufferably monotonous. 

An appetite is a good and excellent thing. To 
eat and drink with relish and satisfaction is a sign 
of good health, one of the precious boons of nature. 
And the tendency to satisfy this appetite, far from 
being sinful, is wholly in keeping with the divine plan, 
and is necessary for a fulsome benefiting of the 
nourishment we take. 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



On the other hand, the digestive organism of 
the body is such a delicate and finely adjusted piece 
of mechanism that any excess is liable to clog its 
workings and put it out of order. It is made for 
sufficiency alone. Nature never intended man to be a 
glutton; and she seldom fails to retaliate and avenge 
excesses by pain, disease and death. 

This fact coupled with the grossness of the vice 
of gluttony makes it happily rare, at least in its most 
repulsive form; for, be it said, it is here question of 
the excessive use of ordinary food and drink, and not 
of intoxicants to which latter form of gluttony we 
shall pay our respects later. 

The rich are more liable than the poor to sin by 
gluttony; but gluttony is fatal to longevity, and they 
who enjoy best life, desire to live longest. 'Tis true, 
physicians claim that a large portion of diseases are 
due to over-eating and over-drinking; but it must be 
admitted that this is through ignorance rather than 
malice. So that this passion can hardly be said to be 
commonly yielded to, at least to the extent of grievous 
offending. 

Naturally, the degree of excess in eating and 
drinking is to be measured according to age, 
temperament, condition of life, etc. The term gluttony 
is relative. What would be a sin for one person might 
be permitted as lawful to another. One man might 
starve on what would constitute a sufficiency for more 
than one. Then again, not only the quantity, but 
the quality, time and manner, enter for something in 
determining just where excess begins. It is difficult 
therefore, and it is impossible, to lay down a general 
rule that will fit all cases. 

It is evident, however, that he is mortally guilty 
who is so far buried in the flesh as to make eating and 
drinking the sole end of life, who makes a god of his 
stomach. Nor is it necessary to mention certain 
immentionable excesses such as were practiced by the 



GLUTTONY. 



57 



degenerate Romans towards the fall of the Empire. 
It would likewise be a grievous sin of gluttony to put 
the satisfaction of one's appetite before the law of the 
Church and violate wantonly the precepts of fasting 
and abstinence. 

And are there no sins of gluttony besides these? 
Yes, and three rules may be laid down, the application 
of which to each particular case will reveal the malice 
of the individual. Overwrought attachment to 
satisfactions of the palate, betrayed by constant 
thinking of viands and pleasures of the table, and by 
avidity in taking nourishment, betokens a dangerous, 
if not a positively sinful, degree of sensuality. Then, 
to continue eating or drinking after the appetite is 
appeased, is in itself an excess^ and mortal sin may 
be committed even without going to the last extreme. 
Lastly, it is easy to yield inordinately to this passion 
by attaching undue importance to the quality of our 
victuals, seeking after delicacies that do not become 
our rank, and catering to an over-refined palate. The 
evil of all this consists in that we seem to eat and 
drink, if we do not in fact eat and drink, to satisfy 
our sensuality first, and to nourish our bodies after- 
wards ; and this is contrary to the law of nature. 

We seemed to insist from the beginning that this 
is not a very dangerous or common practice. Yet 
there must be a hidden and especial malice in it. Else 
why is fasting and abstinence — two correctives of 
gluttony — so much in honor and so universally 
recommended and commanded in the Church? 
Counting three weeks in Advent, seven in Lent and 
three Ember days four times a year, we have, without 
mentioning fifty-two Fridays, thirteen weeks or one- 
fourth of the year by order devoted to a practical 
warfare on gluttony. No other vice receives the honor 
of such systematic and uncompromising resistance. 
The enemy must be worthy. 

As a matter of fact, there lies under all this a 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



great moral principle of Christian philosophy. This 
philosophy sought out and found the cause and seat 
of all evil to be in the flesh. The forces of sin reside 
in the flesh while the powers of righteousness — 
faith, reason and will — are in the spirit. The 
real issue of life is between these forces contending 
for supremacy. The spirit should rule; that is the 
order of our being. But the flesh revolts, and by 
ensnaring the will endeavors to dominate over the 
spirit. 

Now it stands to reason that the only way for 
the superior part to succeed is to weaken the inferior 
part. Just as prayer and the grace of the sacraments 
fortify the soul, so do food and drink nourish the 
animal ; and if the latter is cared for to the detriment 
of the soul, it waxes strong and formidable and 
becomes a menace. 

The only resource for the soul is then to cut off 
the supply that benefits the flesh, and strengthen 
herself thereby. She acts like a wise engineer who 
keeps the explosive and dangerous force of his 
locomotive within the limit by reducing the quantity 
of food he throws into its stomach. Thus the passions 
being weakened become docile, and are easily held 
under sway by the power that is destined to govern, 
and sin is thus rendered morally impossible. 

It is gluttony that furnishes the passion of the 
flesh with fuel by feeding the animal too well; and 
herein lies the great danger and malice of this vice. 
The evil of a slight excess may not be great in itself ; 
but that evil is great in its consequences. Little 
over-indulgences imperceptibly, but none the less 
surely, strengthen the flesh against the spirit, and 
when the temptation comes the spirit will be overcome. 
The ruse of the saints was to starve the enemy. 



CHAPTER XIV. 



DRINK. 

Intemperance is the immoderate use of anything, 
good or bad; here the word is used to imply an 
excessive use of alcoholic beverages, which excess, 
when it reaches the dignity of a habit or vice, makes a 
man a drunkard. A drunkard who indulges in "high- 
balls" and other beverages of fancy price and name, is 
euphemistically styled a "tippler;" his brother, a poor 
devil who swallows vile concoctions or red "pizen" is 
called a plain, ordinary "soak." Whatever name we 
give to such gluttons, the evil in both is the same ; 'tis 
the evil of gluttony. 

This vice differs from gluttony proper in that its 
object is strong drink, while the latter is an abuse of 
food and nourishment necessary, in regulated quantity, 
for the sustenance of the body. But alcohol is not 
necessary to sustain life as an habitual beverage; it 
may stimulate, but it does not sustain at all. It has 
its legitimate uses, like strychnine and other poison 
and drugs ; but being a poison, it must be detrimental 
to living tissues, when taken frequently, and cannot 
have been intended by the Creator as a life-giving 
nourishment. Its habitual use is therefore not a 
necessity. Its abuse has therefore a more far-fetched 
malice. 

But its use is not sinful, any more than the use 
of any drug, for alcohol, or liquor, is a creature of 
God and is made for good purposes. Its use is not 
evil, whether it does little good, or no good at all. The 
fact of its being unnecessary does not make it a for- 
bidden fruit. The habit of stimulants, like the habit 
of tobacco, while it has no title to be called a good 



6o 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



habit, cannot be qualified as an intrinsically bad habit ; 
it may be tolerated as long as it is kept within the 
bounds of sane reason and does not give rise to evil 
consequences in self or others. Apart, therefore, from 
the danger of abuse — a real and fatal danger for many, 
especially for the young — and from the evil effects that 
may follow even a moderate use, the habit is like 
another; a temperate man is not, to any appreciable 
degree, less righteous than a moderate smoker. The 
man who can use and not abuse is just as moral as his 
brother who does not use lest he abuse. He must, 
however, be said to be less virtuous than another who 
abstains rather than run the risk of being even a 
remote occasion of sin unto the weak. 

The intrinsic malice therefore of this habit 
consists in the disorder of excess, which is called 
intoxication. Intoxication may exist in different 
degrees and stages ; it is the state of a man who loses, 
to any extent, control over his reasoning faculties 
through the effects of alcohol. There is evil and sin 
the moment the brain is affected; when reason totters 
and falls from its throne in the soul, then the crime 
is consummated. When a man says and does and 
thinks what in his sober senses he would not say, do, 
or think, that man is drunk, and there is mortal sin 
on his soul. It is not an easy matter to define just 
when intoxication properly begins and sobriety ends ; 
every man must do that for himself. But he should 
consider himself well on the road to guilt when, being 
aware that the fumes of liquor were fast beclouding 
his mind, he took another glass that was certain to 
still further obscure his reason and paralyze his will. 

Much has been said and written about the gross- 
ness of this vice, its baneful effects and consequences, 
to which it were useless here to refer. Suffice it to 
say there is nothing that besots a man more completely 
and lowers him more ignobly to the level of the brute. 
He falls below, for the most stupid of brutes, the ass, 



DRINK. 



6l 



' knows when it has enough ; and the drunkard does not. 
It requires small wit indeed to understand that there 
is no sin in the catalogue of crime that a person in 
this state is not capable of committing. He will do 
things the very brute would blush to do; and then 
he will say it was one of the devil's jokes. The effects 
on individuals, families and generations, born and 
unborn, cannot be exaggerated; and the drunkard is 
a tempter of God and the curse of society. 

Temperance is a moderate use of strong drink; 
teetotalism is absolute abstention therefrom. A man 
may be temperate without being a teetotaler; all 
teetotalers are temperate, at least as far as alcohol is 
concerned, although they are sometimes, some of them, 
accused of using temperance as a cloak for much 
intemperance of speech. If this be true — and there 
are cranks in all causes — then temperance is itself the 
greatest sufferer. Exaggeration is a mistake ; it repels 
right-thinking men and never served any purpose. We 
believe it has done the cause of teetotalism a world of 
harm. But it is poor logic that will identify with so 
holy a cause the rabid rantings of a few irresponsible 
fools. 

The cause of total abstinence is a holy and 
righteous cause. It takes its stand against one of the 
greatest evils, moral and social, of the day. It seeks 
to redeem the fallen, and to save the young and 
inexperienced. Its means are organization and the 
mighty weapon of good example. It attracts those 
who need it and those who do not need it ; the former, 
to save them; the latter, to help save others. And 
there is no banner under which Catholic youth could 
more honorably be enrolled than the banner of total 
abstinence. The man who condemns or decries such 
a cause either does not know what he is attacking or 
his mouthings are not worth the attention of those 
who esteem honesty and hate hypocrisy. It is not 
necessary to be able to practice virtue in order to 



62 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



esteem its worth. And it does not make a fellow 
appear any better even to himself to condemn a cause 
that condemns his faults. 

Saloon-keepers are engaged in an enterprise 
which in itself is lawful ; the same can be said of those 
who buy and sell poisons and dynamite and fire-arms. 
The nature of his merchandise differentiates his 
business from all other kinds of business, and his 
responsibilities are of the heaviest. It may, and often 
does, happen that this business is criminal ; and in this 
matter the civil law may be silent, but the moral law 
is not. For many a one such a place is an occasion 
of sin, often a near occasion. It is not comforting to 
kneel in prayer to God with the thought in one's mind 
that one is helping many to damnation, and that the 
curses of drunkards' wives and mothers and children 
are being piled upon one's head. How far the average 
liquor seller is guilty, God only knows ; but a man 
with a deep concern for his soul's salvation, it seems, 
would not like to take the risk. 



CHAPTER XV. 
ENVY. 

When envy catches a victim she places an evil 
eye in his mind, gives him a cud to chew, and then 
sends him gadding. 

If the mind's eye feeds upon one's own excellence 
for one's own satisfaction, that is pride; if it feeds 
upon the neighbor's good for one's own displeasure 
and unhappiness, that is envy. It is not alone this dis- 
pleasure that makes envy, but the reason of this 
displeasure, that is, what the evil eye discerns in the 



ENVY. 



neighbor's excellence, namely, a detriment, an obstacle 
to one's own success. It is not necessary that another's 
prosperity really work injury to our own; it is 
sufficient that the evil eye, through its discolored 
vision, perceive a prejudice therein. ''Ah!" says envy, 
*'he is happy, prosperous, esteemed ! My chances are 
spoiled. I am overshadowed. I am nothing, he is 
everything. I am nothing because he is everything." 

Remember that competition, emulation, rivalry are 
not necessarily envy. I dread to see my rival succeed. 
I am pained if he does succeed. But the cause of this 
annoyance and vexation is less his superiority than 
my inferiority. I regret my failure more than his 
success. There is no evil eye. 'Tis the sting of defeat 
that causes me pain. If I regret this or that man's 
elevation because I fear he will abuse his power; if I 
become indignant at the success of an unworthy 
person; I am not envious, because this superiority of 
another does not appear to me to be a prejudice to my 
standing. Whatever sin there is, there is no sin 
of envy. 

We may safely assume that a person who would 
be saddened by the success of another, would not 
fail to rejoice at that other's misfortune. This is a 
grievous offense against charity, but it is not, properly 
speaking, envy, for envy is always sad ; it is rather an 
effect of envy, a natural product thereof and a form 
of hatred. 

This unnatural view of things which we qualify 
as the evil eye, is not a sin until it reaches the dignity 
of a sober judgment, for only then does it become 
a human act. Envy like pride, anger, and the other 
vicious inclinations, may and often does crop out in 
our nature, momentarily, without our incurring guilt, 
if it is checked before it receives the acquiescence of 
the will, it is void of wrong, and only serves to remind 
us that we have a rich fund of malice in our nature 
capable of an abundant yield of iniquity. 



64 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



After being born in the mind, envy passes to the 
feeUngs where it matures and furnishes that supply 
of misery which characterizes the vice. Another is 
happy at our expense; the sensation is a painful one, 
yet it has a diabolical fascination, and we fondle and 
caress it. We brood over our affliction to the embit- 
tering and souring of our souls. We swallow and 
regurgitate over and over again our dissatisfaction, 
and are aptly said to chew the cud of bitterness. 

Out of such soil as this naturally springs a rank 
growth of uncharity and injustice in thought and 
desire. The mind and heart of envy are untrammeled 
by all bonds of moral law. It may think all evil of a 
rival and wish him all evil. He becomes an enemy, and 
finally he is hated. Envy points directly to hatred. 

Lastly, envy is "a gadding passion, it walketh the 
street and does not keep home." It were better to say 
that it ''talketh." There is nothing like language to 
relieve one's feelings ; it is quieting and soothing, and 
envy has strong feelings. Hence, evil insinuations, 
detraction, slander, etc. Justice becomes an empty 
word and the seamless robe of charity is torn to shreds. 
As an agent of destruction envy easily holds the palm, 
for it commands the two strong passions of pride and 
anger, and they do its bidding. 

People scarcely ever acknowledge themselves 
envious. It is such a base, unreasonable and unnatural 
vice. If we cannot rejoice with the neighbor, why be 
pained at his felicity? And what an insanity it is to 
imagine that in this wide world one cannot be happy 
without prejudicing the happiness of another! What 
a severe shock it would be to the discontented, the 
morosely sour, the cynic, and other human owls, to be 
told that they are victims of this green-eyed monster. 
They would confess to calumny, and hatred ; to envy, 
never ! 

Envy can only exist where there is abundant 
pride. It is a form of pride, a shape which it fre- 



ENVY. 



6s 



quently assumes, because under this disguise it can 
penetrate everywhere without being as much as 
noticed. And it is so seldom detected that wherever 
it gains entrance it can hope to remain indefinitely. 

Jealousy and envy are often confounded ; yet they 
differ in that the latter looks on what is another's, 
while the former concerns itself with what is in one's 
own possession. I envy what is not mine ; I am jealous 
of what is my own. Jealousy has a saddening 
influence upon us, by reason of a fear, more or less 
well grounded, that what we have will be taken from 
us. We foresee an injustice and resent it. 

Kept within the limits of sane reason, jealousy is 
not wrong, for it is founded on the right we have to 
what is ours. It is in our nature to cling to what 
belongs to us, to regret being deprived of it, and to 
guard ourselves against injustice. 

But when this fear is without cause, visionary, 
unreasonable, jealousy partakes of the nature and 
malice of envy. It is even more malignant a passion, 
and leads to greater disorders and crimes, for while 
envy is based on nothing at all, there is here a true 
foundation in the right of possession, and a motive in 
right to repel injustice. 



CHAPTER XVI. 
SLOTH. 

Not the least, if the last, of capital sins is sloth, 
and it is very properly placed ; for who ever saw the 
sluggard or victim of this passion anywhere but after 
all others, last ! 

Sloth, of course, is a horror of difficulty, an 
aversion; fon i labor, pain and effort, which must be 



66 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



traced to a great love of one's comfort and ease. 
Either the lazy fellow does nothing at all — and this 
is sloth; or he abstains from doing what he should 
do while otherwise busily occupied — and this too, is 
sloth ; or he does it poorly, negligently, half-heartedly 
— and this again is sloth. Nature imposes upon us 
the law of labor. He who shirks in whole or in part 
is slothful. 

Here, in the moral realm, we refer properly to the 
difficulty we find in the service of God^ in fulfiling our 
obligations as Christians and Catholics, in avoiding evil 
and doing good ; in a word, to the discharge of our 
spiritual duties. But then all human obligations have 
a spiritual side, by the fact of their being obligations. 
Thus, labor is not, like attendance at mass, a spiritual 
necessity ; but to provide for those who are dependent 
upon us is a moral obligation and to shirk it would be 
a sin of sloth. 

Not that it is necessary, if we would avoid sin, to 
hate repose naturally and experience no difficulty or 
repugnance in working out our soul's salvation. Sloth 
is inbred in our nature. There is no one but would 
rather avoid than meet difficulties. The service of God 
is laborious and painful. The kingdom of God suffers 
violence. It has always been true since the time of our 
ancestor Adam, that vice is easy, and virtue difficult ; 
that the flesh is weak, and repugnance to effort, natural 
because of the burden of the flesh. So that, in this 
general case, sloth is an obstacle to overcome rather 
than a fault of the will. We may abhor exertion, feel 
the laziest of mortals ; if we effect our purpose in spite 
of all that, we can do no sin. 

Sometimes sloth takes on an acute form known as 
aridity or barrenness in all things that pertain to God. 
The most virtuous souls are not always exempt from 
this. It is a dislike, a distaste that amounts almost to 
a disgust for prayer especially, a repugnance that 
threatens to overwhelm the soul. That is simply an 
absence of sensible fervor^ a state of affliction and pro- 



SLOTH. 



67 



bation that' is as pleasing to God as it is painful to 
us. After all where would the merit be in the service 
of Godj if there were no difficulty ? 

The type of the spiritually indolent is that fixture 
known as the half-baked Catholic — some people call 
him "a poor stick" — Vv^ho is too lazy to meet his obli- 
gations with his Maker. He says no prayers, because 
he can't; he lies abed Sunday mornings and lets the 
others go to mass — he is too tired and needs rest; 
the effort necessary to prepare for and to go to confes- 
sion is quite beyond him. In fine, religion is altogether 
too exacting, requires too much of a man. 

And, as if to remove all doubt as to the purely 
spiritual character of this inactivity, our friend can be 
seen, without a complaint, struggling every day to earn 
the dollar. He will not grumble about rising at five 
to go fishing or cycling. He will, after his hard day's 
work, sit till twelve at the theatre or dance till two in 
the morning. He will spend his energy in any direc- 
tion save in that which leads to God. 

Others expect virtue to be as easy as it is beautiful. 
Religion should conduce to one's comfort. They like 
incense, but not the smell of brimstone. They would re- 
main forever content on Tabor, but the dark frown of 
Calvary is insupportable. Beautiful churches, artistic 
music, eloquent preaching on interesting topics, that 
is their idea of religion ; that is what thev intend relig- 
ion — their religion — shall be, and they proceed to cut 
out whatever jars their finer feelings. This is fashion- 
able, but it is not Christian : to do anything for God — 
if it is easy; and if it is hard, — well, God does not 
expect so much of us. 

You will see at a glance that this sort of a thing Is 
fatal to the sense of God in the soul ; it has for its 
first, direct and immediate effect to weaken little by lit- 
tle the faith until it finally kills it altog-ether. Sloth is 
a microbe. It creeps into the soul, sucks in its sub- 
stance and causes a spiritual consumption. This is 



68 



MORAL BRIEFS^ 



neither an acute nor a violent malady, but it consumes 
the patient, dries him up, wears him out, till life goes 
out like a lamp without oil. 



CHAPTER XVII. 
WHAT WE BELIEVE. 

Our first duty to God, and the first obligation 
imposed upon us by the First Commandment is Faith, 
or belief in God — we must know Him. 

Belief is solely a manner of knowing. It is one 
way of apprehending, or getting possession of, a truth. 
There are other ways of acquiring knowledge; by the 
senses, for instance, seeing, hearing, etc., and by our 
intelligence or reason. When truth comes to us 
through the senses, it is called experience; if the 
reason presents it, it is called science; if we use the 
faculty of the soul known as faith, it is belief. 

You will observe that belief, experience and 
science have one and the same object, namely, truth. 
These differ only in the manner of apprehending truth. 
Belief relies on the testimony of others ; experience, 
on the testimony of the senses; science, on that of the 
reason. What I believe, I get from others ; what I 
experience or understand, I owe to my individual self. 
I neither believe nor understand that Hartford exists 
— I see it. I neither understand nor see that Rome 
exists — I believe it. I neither see nor believe that 
two parallel lines will never meet — I reason it out, I 
understand it. 

Now it is beside the question here to object that 
belief, or what we believe, may or ma}^ not be true. 
Neither is all that we see, nor all that our reason 
produces, true. Human experience and human 



WHAT WE BELIEVE. 



69 



reason, like all things human, may err. Here we 
simply remark that truth is the object of our belief, 
as it is the object of our experience and of understand- 
ing. We shall later see that if human belief may err, 
faith or divine belief cannot mislead us, cannot be 
false. 

Neither is it in order here to contend that belief, 
of its very nature, is something uncertain, that it is 
synonymous of opinion; or if it supposes a judgment, 
that judgment is *'formidolose," liable at any moment 
to be changed or contradicted. The testimony of the 
senses and of reason does not always carry certain 
conviction. We may or may not be satisfied with the 
evidence of human belief. As for the divine, or faith, 
it is certain, or it is not at all ; and who would not be 
satisfied with the guarantee offered by the Word of 
God! 

And the truths we believe are those revealed by 
God, received by us through a double agency, the 
written and the oral word, known as Scripture and 
Tradition. Scripture is contained in the two Testa- 
ments ; Tradition is found in the bosom, the life of 
the Church of Christ, in the constant and universal 
teachings of that Church. 

The Scripture being a dead letter cannot explain 
or interpret itself. Yet, since it is applied to the ever- 
varying lives of men, it needs an explanation and an 
interpretation; it is practically of no value without 
it. And in order that the truth thus presented be 
accepted by men, it is necessary, of prime necessity, 
that it have the guarantee of infallibility. This infalli- 
bility the Church of Christ possesses, else His mission 
were a failure. 

This infallibility is to control the vagaries of 
Tradition, for Tradition, of its very nature, tends to 
exaggeration, as we find in the legends of ancient 
peoples. Exaggerated, they destroy themselves, but 
in the bosom of God's Church these truths forever 
retain their character unchanged and unchangeable. 



70 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



If you accept the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth as revealed by God and delivered 
to man by the infallible Church from the Bible and 
Tradition, you have what is called ecclesiastical. 
Catholic or true faith. There is no other true faith. 
It is even an open question whether there is any faith 
at all outside of this; for outside the Church there is 
no reasonable foundation for faith, and our faith must 
be reasonable. 

However, granting that such a thing can be, the 
faith of him who takes and leaves off the divine Word 
is called divine faith. He is supposed to ignore in- 
vincibly a portion of revealed truth, but he accepts 
what he knows. If he knew something and refused 
to embrace it, he would have no faith at all. The 
same is true of one who having once believed, believes 
no longer. He impeaches the veracity of God, and 
therefore cannot further rely on His Word. 

Lastly, it matters not at all what kind of truths we 
receive from God. Truth is truth always and ever. 
We may not be able to comprehend what is revealed 
to us, and little the wonder. Our intelligence is not 
infinite, and God's is. Many things that men tell 
us we believe without understanding; God deserves 
our trust more than men. Our incapacity for under- 
standing all that faith teaches us proves one thing: 
that there are limits to our powers, which may be 
surprising to some, but is nevertheless true. 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



WHY WE BELIEVE. 

Belief, we have said, is the acceptance of a 
truth from another. We do not always accept what 
others present to us as truth, for the good reason 
that we may have serious doubts as to whether they 
speak the truth or not. It is for us to decide the 
question of our informant's intellectual and moral 
trustworthiness. If we do believe him, it is because 
we consider his veracity to be beyond question. 

The foundation of our belief is therefore the 
veracity of him whose word we take. They tell me 
that Lincoln was assassinated. Personally, I know 
nothing about it. But I do know that they who speak 
of it could know, did know, and could not lead us 
all astray on this point. I accept their evidence; I 
believe on their word. 

It is on the testimony of God's word that we 
believe in matters that pertain to faith. The idea we 
have of God is that He is infinitely perfect, that He 
is all-wise and all-good. He cannot, therefore, under 
pain of destroying His very existence, be deceived or 
deceive us. When, therefore, He speaks. He speaks 
the truth and nothing but the truth. It would be a 
very stultification of our reason to refuse to believe 
Him, once we admit His existence. 

Now, it is not necessary for us to inquire into the 
things He reveals, or to endeavor to discover the why, 
whence and wherefore. It is truth, we are certain of 
it ; what more do we need ! It may be a satisfaction to 
see and understand these truths, just as it is to solve 
a problem two or three different ways. But it is not 
essential, for the result is always the same — truth. 



72 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



But suppose, with my senses and my reason, 1 
come to a result at variance with the first, suppose the 
testimony of God's word and that of my personal 
observations conflict, what then? There is an error 
somewhere. Either God errs or my faculties play me 
false. Which should have the preference of my assent ? 
The question is answered as soon as it is put. I can 
conceive an erring man, but I cannot conceive a false 
God. Nothing human is infallible ; God alone is proof 
against all error. This would not be my first offense 
against truth. 

"Yes, all this is evident. I shall and do believe 
everything that God deigns to reveal, because He says 
it, whether or not I see or understand it. But the 
difficulty with me is how to know that God did speak, 
what He said, what He meant. My difficulty is prac- 
tical, not theoretical." 

And by the same token you have shifted the 
question from "Why we believe" to "Whence we 
believe;" you no longer seek the authority of your 
faith, but its genesis. You believe what God says, 
because He says it ; you believe He did say it because 
— the Church says it. You are no longer dealing with 
the truth itself, but with the messenger that brings 
the truth to be believed. The message of the Church 
is: these are God's words. As for what these words 
stand for, you are not to trust her, but Him. The 
foundation of divine belief is one thing ; the motives of 
credibility are another. 

We should not confound these two things, if we 
would have a clear notion of what faith is, and discover 
the numerous counterfeits that are being palmed off 
nowadays on a world that desires a convenient, rather 
than a genuine article. 

The received manner of belief is first to examine 
the truths proposed as coming from God, measure 
them with the rule of individual reason, of expediency, 
feeling, fancy, and thus to decide upon their merits. If 
this proposition suits, it is accepted. If that other is 



WHY WE BELIEVE. 



73 



found wanting, it is forthwith rejected. And then 
it is in order to set out and prove them to be or not to 
be the word of God, according to their suitability or 
non-suitabiUty. 

One would naturally imagine, as reason and 
common sense certainly suggest, that one's first duty 
would be to convince oneself that God did communicate 
these truths; and if so, then to accept them without 
further dally or comment. There is nothing to be 
done, once God reveals, but to receive His revelation. 

Outside the Church, this procedure is not always 
followed, because of the rationalistic tendencies of 
latter-day Protestantism. It is a glaring fact that 
many do not accept all that God says because He says, 
but because it meets the requirements of their condition, 
feelings or fancy. They lay down the principle that 
a truth, to be a truth, must be understood by the human 
intelligence. This is paramount to asserting that God 
cannot know more than men — blasphemy on the face 
of it. Thus the divine rock-bed of faith is torn away, 
and a human basis substituted. Faith itself is destroyed 
in the process. 

It is, therefore, important, before examining 
whence comes our faith, to remember why we believe, 
and not to forget it. This much gained, and for all 
time, we can go farther; without it, all advance is 
impossible. 



CHAPTER XIX. 

WHENCE OUR BELIEF: REASON. 

My faith is the most reasonable thing in the 
world, and it must needs be such. The Amighty gave 
me intelHgence to direct my life. When He speaks 



74 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



He reveals Himself to me as to an intelligent being 
and He expects that I receive His word intelligently. 
Were I to abdicate my reason in the acceptance of His 
truths, I would do my Maker as great an injury as 
myself. All the rest of creation offers Him an homage 
of pure life, of instinct or feeHng ; man alone can, and 
must, offer a higher, nobler and more acceptable hom- 
age — that of reason. 

My faith is reasonable, and this is the account my 
reason gives of my faith : I can accept as true, without 
in the least comprehending, and far from dishonoring 
my reason, v/ith a positive and becoming dignity, — 1 
can accept! — ^but I must accept — whatever is corSided 
to me by an infallible authority, an authority that can 
neither deceive nor be deceived. There is nothing 
supernatural about this statement. 

That which is perfect cannot be subject to error, 
for error is evil and perfection excludes evil. If God 
exists He is perfect. Allow one imperfection to enter 
into your notion of God, and you destroy that notion. 
When, therefore, God speaks He is an infallible 
authority. This is the philosophy of common sense. 

Now I know that God has spoken. The existence 
of that historical personage known as Jesus of 
Nazareth is more firmly established than that of 
Alexander or Caesar. Four books relate a part of His 
sayings and doings ; and I have infinitely less reason 
to question their authenticity than I have to doubt the 
authenticity of Virgil or Shakespeare. No book 
ever written has been subjected to such a searching, 
probing test of malevolent criticism, at all times 
but especially of late years in Germany and France. 
Great men, scholars, geniuses have devoted their lives 
to the impossible task of explaining the Gospels away, 
with the evident result that the position of the latter 
remains a thousandfold stronger. Unless I reject all 
human testimony, and reason forbids, I must accept 
them as genuine, at least in substance. 



WHENCE OUR BELIEF: REASON, 



75 



These four books relate how Jesus healed 
miraculously the sick, raised the dead to life, led the 
life of the purest, most honest and sagest of men, 
claimed to be God, and proved it by rising from the 
dead Himself. That this man is divine^ reason can 
admit without being unreasonable, and must admit to 
be reasonable ; and revelation has nothing to do with 
the matter. 

A glaring statement among all others, one that is 
reiterated and insisted upon, is that all men should 
share in the fruit of His life ; and for this purpose He 
founded a college of apostles which He called His 
Church, to teach all that He said and did, to all men, 
for all time. The success of His life and mission 
depends upon the continuance of His work. 

Why did He act thus ? I do not know. Are there 
reasons for this economy of salvation? There 
certainly are, else it would not have been established. 
But we are not seeking after reasons ; we are gathering 
facts upon which to build an argument, and these facts 
we take from the authentic life of Christ. 

Now we give the Almighty credit for wisdom in 
all His plans, the wisdom of providing His agencies 
with the means to reach the end they are destined to 
attain. To commission a church to teach all men 
without authority, is to condemn it to utter nothingness 
from the very beginning. To expect men to accept the 
truths He revealed, and such truths! without a guar- 
antee against error in the infallibility of the teacher, is 
to be ignorant of human nature. And since at no time 
must it cease to teach, it must be indefectible. Being 
true, it must be one ; the work of God, it must be holy ; 
being provided for all creatures, it must be Catholic or 
universal ; and being the same as Christ founded upon t» 
His Apostles, it must be apostolic. If it is not all these 
things together, it is not the teacher sent by God to 
instruct and direct men. 

No one who seeks with intelligence, single- 
mindedness and a pure heart, will fail to find these 



76 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



attributes and marks of the true Church of Christ. 
Whether, after finding them, one will make an act of 
faith, is another question. But that he can give his 
assent with the full approval of his reason is absolutely 
certain. Once he does so, he has no further use for his 
reason. He enters the Church, an edifice illumined 
by the superior light of revelation and faith. ?Ie can 
leave reason, like a lantern, at the door. 

Therein he will learn many other truths that he 
never could have found out with reason alone, truths 
superior, but not contrary, to reason. These truths he 
can never repudiate without sinning against reason, 
first, because reason brought him to this pass where he 
must believe without the immediate help of reason. 

One of the first things we shall hear from the 
Church speaking on her own authority is that these 
writings, the four relations of Christ's life, are inspired. 
However a person could discover and prove this truth 
to himself is a mystery that will never be solved. We 
cannot assume it; it must be proven. Unless it be 
proven, the faith based on this assumption is not 
reasonable; and proven it can never be, unless we take 
it from an authority whose infallibility is proven. That 
is why we say that it is doubtful if non-Catholic faith 
is faith at all, because faith must be reasonable ; and 
faith that is based on an assumption is to say the 
least doubtfully reasonable. 



CHAPTER XX. 

WHENCE OUR BELIEF: GRACE AND WILL. 

To believe is to assent to a truth on the authority 
of God's word. We must find that the truth proposed 
is really guaranteed by the authority of God. In this 



WHENCE OUR BELIEF: GRACE AND WILL. 7^ 

process of mental research^ the mind must be satisfied, 
and the truth found to be in consonance with the 
dictates of right reason, or at least, not contrary 
thereto. 

But the fact that we can securely give our assent 
to this truth does not make us believe. Something 
more than reason enters into an act of faith. 

Faith is not something natural, purely human, 
beginning and ending in the brain, and a product 
thereof. This is human belief, not divine, and is 
consequently not faith. 

We believe that faith is, of itself, as far beyond 
the native powers of a human being as the sense of 
feeling is beyond the power of a stone, or intelligence, 
the faculty of comprehension, is beyond the power 
of an animal. In other words, it is supernatural, above 
the natural forces, and requires the power of God to 
give it existence. "No man can come to me, unless 
the Father who has sent Me^ draw him." 

Some have faith, others have it not. Where did 
you get your faith? You were not born with it, as 
you were with the natural, though dormant faculties 
of speech, reason, and free will. You received it 
through Baptism. You are a product of nature; 
therefore nature should limit your existence. But 
faith aspires to, and obtains, an end that is not natural 
but supernatural. It consequently must itself be 
supernatural, and cannot be acquired without divine 
assistance. 

Unless God revealed, you could not know the » 
truths of religion. Unless He established a court 
of final appeal in His Church, you could not be sure 
what He did reveal or what He meant to say. Because 
of the peculiar character of these truths and the nature 
of the certitude we possess, many would not believe 
at all, if God's grace were not there to help them. 
And even though one could and would believe, there 
is no divine belief or faith proper until the soul 
receives the faculty from Him who alone can give it. 



78 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



The reason why many do not believe is not 
because God's grace is wanting nor because their 
minds cannot be satisfied, not because they cannot, but 
because they will not. 

Faith is a gift of God, but not that alone; it is a 
conviction, but not that alone. It is a firm assent of 
the will. We are free to believe or not to believe. 

"As one may be convinced and not act according 
to his conviction, so may one be convinced and not 
believe according to his conviction. The arguments 
of religion do not compel anyone to believe, just as 
the arguments for good conduct do not compel anyone 
to obey. Obedience is the consequence of willing to 
obey, and faith is the consequence of willing to 
believe." 

I am not obliged to receive as true any religious 
dogma, as I am forced to accept the proposition that 
two and two are four. I believe because I choose to 
believe. My faith is a submission of the will. The 
authority of God is not binding on me physically, for 
men have refused and still do refuse to submit to His 
authority and the authority He communicated to His 
Church. And I know that I, too, can refuse and 
perhaps more than once have been tempted to refuse, 
my assent to truths that interfered too painfully with 
my interests and passions. 

Besides, faith is meritorious, and in order to merit 
one must do something difficult and be free to act. The 
difficulty is to believe what we cannot understand, 
through pride of intelligence, and to bring that stiff 
domineering faculty to recognize a superior. 
The difficulty is to bend the will to the acceptance 
of truths, and consequent obligations that gall 
our self-love and the flesh. The believer must 
have humility and self-denial. The grace of God 
follows these virtues into a soul, and then your act 
of faith is complete. 

Herein we discover the great wisdom of God 
who sets the price of faith, and of salvation that 



WHENCE OUR BELIEF: GRACE AND WILL. 79 

depends on it, not on the mind, but on the will; 
not on the intelligence alone, but on the heart. To 
no man is grace denied. Every man has the will to 
grasp what is good. But though to all He gives a 
will, all have not the same degree of intelligence; He 
does not endow them equally in this respect. How 
then could He make intelligence the first principle of 
salvation and of faith? God searches the heart, not 
the mind. A modicum of wit is guaranteed to all to 
know that they can safely believe. Be one ever so 
unlettered and ignorant, and dull, faith and heaven 
are to him as accessible as to the sage, savant and the 
genius. For all, the way is the same. 



CHAPTER XXI. 
HOW WE BELIEVE. 

Faith is the edifice of a Christian life. It is, of 
itself, a mere shell, so to speak, for unless good works 
sustain and adorn it, it will crumble, and the Almighty 
in His day will reduce it to ashes ; faith without works 
is of no avail. The corner stone of this edifice is the 
authority of the word of God, while His gratuitous 
grace, our intelligence and will furnish the material 
for build "ng. Now, there are three features of that 
spiritual construction that deserve a moment's 
consideration. 

First, the edifice is solid ; our faith must be firm. 
No hesitation, no wavering, no deliberate doubting, 
no suspicion, no take-and-leave. What we believe 
comes from God, and we have the infallible authority 
of the Church for it, and of that we must be certain. 
That certainly must not for a moment falter, and the 



8o 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



moment it does falter, there is no telling but that the 
whole edifice so laboriously raised will tumble down 
upon the guilty shoulders of the imprudent doubter. 

And of reasons for hesitating and disbelieving 
there is absolutely none, once we have made the 
venture of faith and believe sincerely and reasonably. 
No human power can in reason impugn revealed truths 
for they are impervious to human intelligence. One 
book may not at the same time be three books ; but can 
one divine nature be at one and the same time three 
divine persons? Until we learn what divinity and 
personality are we can affirm nothing on the authority 
of pure reason. If we cannot assert, how can we deny? 
And if we know nothing about it, how can we do 
either? The question is not how is it, but if it is. 
While it stands thus, and thus ever it must stand, no 
objection or doubt born of human mind can influence 
our belief. Nothing but pride of mind and corruption 
of heart can disturb it. 

If you have a difficulty, well, it is a difficulty, 
and nothing more. A difficulty does not destroy a 
thesis that is solidly founded. Once a truth is clearly 
established, not all the difficulties in the world can ^ 
make it an untruth. A difficulty as to the truth ' 
revealed argues an imperfect intelligence; it is idle to 
complain that we are finite. A difficulty regarding 
the infallible Church should not make her less infallible 
in our mind, it simply demands a clearing away. 
Theological difficulties should not surprise a novice in 
theological matters ; they are only misunderstandings 
that militate less against the Church than against the 
erroneous notions we have of her. To allow such 
difficulties to undermine faith is like overthrowing 
a solid wall with a soap-bubble. Common sense 
demands that nothing but clearly demonstrated falsi Ly 
should make us change firm convictions, and such 
demonstration can never be made against our faith. 

Not from difficulties, properly speaking, but from 
our incapacity for understanding what we accept as 



HOW WE BELIEVE. 



8i 



true, results a certain obscurity, which is another 
feature of faith. Believing is not seeing. Such strange 
things we do believe ! Who can unravel the mysteries 
of religion? Moral certitude is sufficient to direct 
one's life, to make our acts human and moral and is 
all we can expect in this world where nothing is 
perfect. But because the consequences of faith are so 
far-reaching, we would believe nothing short of 
absolute, metaphysical certitude. 

But this is impossible. Hence the mist, the vague 
dimness that surrounds faith, baffling every effort to 
penetrate it ; and within, a sense of rarefied perception 
that disquiets and torments unless humility born of 
common sense be there to soothe and set us at rest. 
Moral truths are not geometric theorems and multi- 
plication tables, and it is not necessary that they 
should be. 

Of course, if, as in science so in faith, reason 
were everything, our position would hardly be tenable, 
for then there should be no vagueness but clear vision. 
But the will enters for something in our act of faith. 
If everything we believe were as luminous as "two 
and two are four," a special act of the will would 
be utterly uncalled for. We must be able, free to 
dissent, and this is the reason of the obscurity of our 
faith. 

It goes without saying that such belief is 
meritorious. Christ Himself said that to be saved it 
is necessary to believe, and no man is saved but 
through his own merit. Faith is, therefore, gratuitous 
on His part and meritorious on ours. It is in reality 
a good work that proceeds from the will, under the 
dictates of right reason, with the assistance of divine 
grace. 



CHAPTER XXII. 

FAITH AND ERROR. 

Intolerance is a harsh term. It is stern, rigid, 
brutal, almost. It makes no compromise, combats a 
outrance and exacts blind and absolute obedience. 
Among individuals tolerance should prevail, man 
should be liberal with man, the Law of Charity 
demands it. In regard to principles, there must and 
shall eternally be antagonism between truth and error, 
justice demands it. It is a case of self-preservation; 
one destroys the other. Political truth can never 
tolerate treason preached or practised; neither can 
religious truth tolerate unbelief and heresy preached 
or practised. 

Now our faith is based on truth, the Church is 
the custodian of faith, and the Church, on the platform 
of religious truth, is absolutely uncompromising and 
intolerant, just as the State is in regard to treason. 
She cannot admit error, she cannot approve error; 
to do so would be suicidal. She cannot lend the 
approval of her presence, nay even of her silence, to 
error. She stands aloof from heresy, must always 
see in it an enemy, condemns it and cannot help 
condemning it, for she stands for truth, pure and 
unalloyed truth, which error pollutes and outrages. 

Call this what you will, but it is the attitude of 
honesty first, and of necessity afterwards. "He who 
is liberal with what belongs to him is generous, 
he who undertakes to be generous with what does not 
belong to him is dishonest." Our faith is not founded 
on an act or agreement of men, but on the revelation 
of God. No human agency can change or modify it. 
Neither Church nor Pope can be liberal with the faith 



FAITH AND ERROR. 



83 



of which they are the custodians. Their sole duty is 
to guard and protect it as a precious deposit for the 
salvation of men. 

This is the stand all governments take when there 
is question of political truth. And whatever lack of 
generosity or broadmindedness there be, however 
' contrary to the spirit of this free age it may seem, it 
is nevertheless the attitude of God Himself who hates 
error, for it is evil, who pursues it with His wrath 
through time and through eternity. How can a 
custodian of divine truth act otherwise? Even in 
human affairs, can one admit that two and three are 
seven ? 

We sometimes hear it said that this intolerance 
takes from Catholics the right to think. This is true 
in the same sense that penitentiaries, or the dread of 
them, deprive citizens of the right to act. Everybody, 
outside of sleeping hours and with his thinking machine 
in good order, thinks. Perhaps if there were a little 
more of it, there would be more solid convictions 
and more practical faith. Holy Writ has it some- 
where that the whole world is given over to vice and 
sin because there is no one who thinks. 

But you have not and never had the right to think 
as you please, inside or outside the Church. This 
means the right to form false judgments, to dra/w 
conclusions contrary to fact. This is not a right, it is 
a defect, a disease. Thus to act is not the normal 
function of the brain. It is no more the nature of the 
mind to generate falsehoods than it is the nature of a 
sewing machine to cut hair. Both were made for 
different things. He therefore who disobeys the law 
that governs his mind prostitutes that faculty to error. 

But suppose, being a Catholic, I cannot see things 
in that true light, what then? In such a case, either 
you persist, in the matter of your faith, in being guided 
by the smoky lamp of your reason alone, or you will 
be guided by the authority of God's appointed Church. 
In the first alternative, your place is not in the Church, 



84 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



for you exclude yourself by not living up to the 
conditions of her membership. You cannot deny but 
that she has the right to determine those conditions. 

If you choose the latter, then correct yourself. It 
is human to err, but it is stupidity to persist in error 
and refuse to be enlightened. If you cannot see for 
yourself, common sense demands that you get another 
to see for you. You are not supposed to know the 
alpha and omega of theological science, but you are 
bound to possess a satisfactory knowledge in order 
that your faith be reasonable. 

Has no one a right to differ from the Church? 
Yes, those who err unconsciously, vv^ho can do so 
conscientiously, that is, those who have no suspicion 
of their being in error. These the heavenly Father 
will look after and bring safe to Himself, for their 
error is material and not formal. He loves them but 
He hates their errors. So does the Church abominate 
the false doctrines that prevail in the world outside her 
fold, yet at the same time she has naught but 
compassion and pity and prayers for those deluded 
ones who spread and receive those errors. To her 
the individual is sacred, but the heresy is damnable. 

Thus we may mingle with our fellow citizens m 
business and in pleasure, socially and politically, but 
religiously — never. Our charity we can offer in its 
fullest measure, but charity that lends itself to error, 
loses its sacred character and becomes the handmaid 
of evil* for error is evil. 



CHAPTER XXIII. 



THE CONSISTENT BELIEVER. 

The intolerance of the Church towards error, the 
natural position of One who is the custodian of truth, 
her only reasonable attitude, makes her forbid her 
children to read, or listen to, heretical controversy, 
or to endeavor to discover religious truth by examining 
both sides of the question. This places the Catholic 
in a position whereby he must stand aloof from all 
manner of doctrinal teaching other than that delivered 
by his Church through her accredited ministers. And 
whatever outsiders may think of the correctness of his 
belief and religious principles, they cannot have two 
opinions as to the logic and consistency of this stand 
he takes. They may hurl at him all the choice epithets 
they choose for being a slave to superstition and 
erroneous creeds ; but they must give him credit for 
being consistent in his belief; and consistency in 
religious matters is too rare a commodity these days 
to be made light of. 

The reason of this stand of his is that, for him, 
there can be no two sides to a question which for him 
is settled; for him, there is no seeking after the truth: 
he posses 3es it in its fulness, as far as God and religion 
are concerned. His Church gives him all there is to 
be had; all else is counterfeit. And if he believes, as 
he should and does believe, that revealed truth comes, 
and can come, only by way of external authority, and 
not by way of private judgment and investigation, he 
must refuse to be liberal in the sense of reading all 
sorts of Protestant controversial literature and listening 
to all kinds of heretical sermons. If he does not this, 
he is false to his principles ; he contradicts himself 



86 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



by accepting and not accepting an infallible Church; 
he knocks his religious props from imder himself a d 
stands— nowhere. The attitude of the Catholic, there- 
fore, is logical and necessary. Holding to Catholic 
principles how can he do otherwise? How can he 
consistently seek after truth when he is convinced 
that he holds it? Who else can teach him religious 
truth when he believes that an infallible Church gives 
him God's word and interprets it in the true and 
only sense? 

A Protestant may not assume this attitude or 
impose it upon those under his charge. If he does so, 
he is out of harmony with his principles and denies 
the basic rule of his belief. A Protestant believes 
in no infallible authority; he is an authority unto 
himself, which authority he does not claim to be 
infallible, if he is sober and sane. He is after truth ; 
and whatever he finds, and wherever he finds it, he 
subjects it to his own private judgment. He is free 
to accept or reject, as he pleases. He is not, cannot 
be, absolutely certain that what he holds is true; he 
thinks it is. He may discover to-day that yesterday's 
truths are not truths at all. We are not here examining 
the soundness of this doctrine; but it does follow 
therefrom, sound or unsound, that he may consistently 
go where he likes to hear religious doctrine exposed 
and explained, he may listen to whomever has religious 
information to impart. He not only may do it, but 
he is consistent only when he does. It is his duty to 
seek after truth, to read and listen to controversial 
books and sermons. 

If therefore a non-Catholic sincerely believes in 
private Judgment, how can he consistently act like a 
Catholic who stands on a platform diametrically 
opposed to his, against which platform it is the very 
essence of his religion to protest ? How can he refuse 
to hear Catholic preaching and teaching, any more 
than Baptist, Methodist and Episcopalian doctrines? 
He has no right to do so, unless he knows all the 



THE CONSISTENT BELIEVER. 



87 



Catholic Church teaches, which case may be safely 
put down as one in ten miUion. He may become a 
Catholic, or lose all the faith he has. That is one of the 
risks he has to take, being a Protestant. 

If he is faithful to his own principles and under- 
stands the Catholic point of view, he must not be 
surprised if his Catholic friends do not imitate his 
so-called liberality; they have motives which he haj 
not. If he is honest, he will not urge or even expect 
them to attend the services of his particular belief. 
And a Catholic who thinks that because a Protestant 
friend can accompany him to Catholic services, he too 
should return the compliment and accompany his 
friend to Protestant worship, has a faith that needs 
immediate toning up to the standard of Catholicity; 
he is in ignorance of the first principles of his religion 
and belief. 

A Catholic philosopher resumes this whole matter 
briefly, and clearly in two syllogisms, as follows : 

Major. He who believes in an infallible teacher 
of revelation cannot consistently listen to any fallible 
teacher with a view of getting more correct informa- 
tion than his infallible teacher gives him. To do so 
would be absurd, for it would be to believe and at the 
same time not believe in the infallible teacher. 

Minor. The Catholic believes in an infallible 
teacher of revelation. 

Conclusion. Therefore, the Catholic cannot 
listen to any fallible teacher with a view of getting 
more correct information about revealed truth than 
his Church gives him. To do so would be to stultify 
himself. 

(II.) 

Major. He who believes in a fallible teacher — 
private judgment or fallible church — is free, nay 
bound, to listen to any teacher who comes along pro- 



88 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



fessing to have information to impart, for at no time 
can he be certain that the findings of his own falHble 
judgment or church are correct. Each newcomer 
may be able to give him further Hght that may cause 
him to change his mind. 

Minor. The Protestant believes in such fallible 
teacher — his private judgment or church. 

Conclusion. Therefore, the Protestant is free to 
hear, and in perfect harmony with his principles, to 
accept the teaching of any one who approaches him 
for the purpose of instructing him. He is free to hear 
with a clear conscience, and let his children hear. Cath- 
olic teaching, for the Church claiming infallibility is 
at its worst as good as his private judgment is at best, 
namely, fallible. 

Religious variations are so numerous nowadays 
that most people care little what another thinks or 
believes. All they ask is that thay may be able to 
know at any time where he stands ; and they insist, as 
right reason imperiously demands, that, in all things, 
he remain true to his principles, whatever they be. 
Honest men respect sincerity and consistency every- 
where ; they have nothing but contempt for those who 
stand, now on one foot, now on the other, who have 
one code for theory and another for practice, who 
shift their grounds as often as convenience suggests. 
The Catholic should bear this well in mind. There can 
^ no compromise with principles of truth ; to sacrifice 
them for the sake of convenience is as despicable before 
man as it is offensive to God. 



CHAPTER XXIV. 



UNBELIEF. 

An atheist in principle is one who denies the 
existence of God and consequently of all revealed 
truth. How, in practice, a man endowed with reason 
and a conscience can do this, is one of the unexplained 
mysteries of life. Christian philosophers refuse to 
admit that an atheist can exist in the flesh. They 
claim that his denial is fathered by his desire and wish, 
that at most he only doubts, and while professing 
atheism, he is simply an agnostic. 

An agnostic does not know whether God exists 
or not — and cares less. He does not affirm, neither 
does he deny. All arguments for and against are either 
insufficient or equally plausible, and they fail to lodge 
conviction in his mind of minds. Elevated upon this 
pedestal of wisdom, he pretends to dismiss all further 
consideration of the First Cause. But he does no such 
thing, for he lives as though God did not exist. Why 
not live as though He did exist ! From a rational point 
of view, he is a bigger fool than his atheistic brother, 
for if certainty is impossible, prudence suggests that 
the surer course be taken. On one hand, there is all to 
gain ; on the other, all to lose. The choice he makes 
smacks of convenience rather than of logic or com- 
mon sense. 

No one may be accused of genuine, or as we call 
it — formal — heresy, unless he persistently refuses to 
believe all the truths by God revealed. Heresy sup- 
poses error, culpable error, stubborn and pertinacious 
error. A person may hold error in good faith, and be 
so disposed as to relinquish it on being convinced of 
the truth. To all exterior appearances, he may differ 



90 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



in nothing from a formal heretic, and he passes for a 
heretic. In fact, and before God, he belongs to the 
Church, to the soul of the Church ; he will be saved if 
in spite of his unconscious error he lives well. He is 
known as a material heretic. 

An infidel is an unbaptized person, whose faith, 
even if he does believe in God, is not supernatural, 
but purely natural. He is an infidel whether he is 
found in darkest Africa or in the midst of this 
Christian commonwealth, and in this latter place there 
are more infidels than most people imagine. A 
decadent Protestantism rejects the necessity of 
baptism, thereby ceasing to be Christian, and in its 
trail infidelity thrives and spreads, disguised, 'tis true, 
but nevertheless genuine infidelity. It is baptism that 
makes faith possible, for faith is a gift of God. 

An apostate is one who, having once believed, 
ceases to believe. All heretics and infidels are not 
apostates, although they may be in themselves or in 
their ancestors. One may apostatize to heresy by 
rejecting the Church, or to infidelity by rejecting all 
revelation; a Protestant may thus become an 
apostate from faith as well as a Catholic. This 
going back on the Almighty — for that is what apostasy 
is, — is, of all misfortunes the worst that can befall 
man. There may be excuses, mitigating circumstances, 
for our greatest sins, but here it is useless to seek for 
any. God gives faith. It is lost only through our own 
fault. God abandons them that abandon Him. 
Apostasy is the most patent case of spiritual suicide, 
and the apostate carries branded on his forehead the 
mark of reprobation. A miracle may save him, but 
nothing short of a miracle can do it^ and who has a 
right to expect it? God is good, but God is also just. 

It is not necessary to pose as an apostate before the 
public. One may be a renegade at heart without 
betraying himself, by refusing his inner assent to a 
dogma of faith, by wilfully doubting and allowing 
such doubts to grow upon him and form convictions. 



UNBELIEF. 



91 



People sometimes say things that would brand 
them as apostates if they meant what they said. This 
or that one, in the midst of an orgy of sin, or after 
long practical irreligion, in order to strangle remorse 
that arises at an inopportune moment, may seem to 
form a judgment of apostasy. This is treading on 
exceedingly thin glass. But it is not always properly 
defection from faith. Apostasy kills faith as surely 
as a knife plunged into the heart kills life. 

A schismatic does not directly err in matters of 
faith, but rejects the discipline of the Church and 
refuses to submit to her authority. He believes all 
that is taught, but puts himself without the pale of the 
Church by his insubordination. Schism is a grievous 
sin, but does not necessarily destroy faith. 

The source of all this unbelief is, of course, in 
the proud mind and sensual heart of man. It takes 
form exteriorly in an interminable series of "isms" 
that have the merit of appealing to the weaknesses of 
man. They all mean the same thing in the end, and 
are only forms of paganism. Rationalism and Mater- 
ialism are the most frequently used terms. One stands 
on reason alone, the other, on matter, and both have 
declared war to the knife on the Supernatural. They 
tell us that these are new brooms destined to sweep 
clean the universe, new lamps intended to dissipate 
the clouds of ignorance and superstition and to purify 
with their light the atmosphere of the world. But, 
truth to tell, these brooms have been stirring up dust 
from the gutters of passion and sin, and these lamps 
have been offending men's nostrils by their smoky 
stench ever since man knew himself. And they shall 
continue to do service in the same cause as long as 
human nature remains what it is. But Christ did not 
bring His faith on earth to be destroyed by the 
lilliputian efforts of man. 



CHAPTER XXV. 



HOW FAITH MAY BE LOST. 

It is part of our belief that no man can lose his 
faith without mortal sin. The conscious rejection of all 
or any religious truth once embraced and forming a 
part of Christian belief, or the deliberate questioning 
of a single article thereof, is a sin, a sin against God's 
light and God's grace. It is a deliberate turning away 
from God. The moral culpability of such an act is 
great in the extreme, while its consequences cannot be 
weighed or measured by any human norm or rule. 

No faith was ever wrecked in a day; it takes 
time to come to such a pass ; it is by easy stages of 
infidelity, by a slow process of half-denials, a constant 
fostering of habits of ignorance, that one undermines, 
little by little, one's spiritual constitution. Taking 
advantage of this state of debility, the microbe of 
unbelief creeps in, eats its way to the soul and finally 
sucks out the very vitals of faith. Nor is this growth 
of evil an unconscious one; and there lies the malice 
and guilt. Ignorant pride, neglect of prayer and 
religious worship, disorders, etc., these are evils the 
culprit knows of and wills. He cannot help feeling 
the ravages being wrought in his soul; he cannot 
help knowing that these are deadly perils to his 
treasure of faith. He complacently allows them to run 
■their course ; and he wakes up one fine morning to 
find his faith gone, lost, dead — and a chasm yawning 
betv^reen him and his God that only a miracle can 
bridge over. 

We mentioned ignorance: this it is that attacks 
the underpinning of faith, its rational basis, by which 
it is made intelligent and reasonable, without which 
there can be no faith. 



HOW FAITH MAY BE LOST. 



93 



Ignorance is, of course, a relative term ; there are 
different degrees and different kinds. An ignorant 
man is not an unlettered or uncultured one, but one 
who does not know what his religion means, what he 
believes or is supposed to believe, and has no reason 
to give for his belief. He may know a great many 
other things, may be chock full of worldly learning, 
but if he ignores these matters that pertain to the soul, 
we shall label him an ignoramus ; for the elementary 
truths of human knowledge are, always have been, 
and always shall be, the solution of the problems of 
the why, the whence and the whither of life here below. 
Great learning frequently goes hand in hand with 
dense ignorance. The Sunday-school child knows 
better than the atheist philosopher the answer to these 
important questions. There is more wisdom in the first 
page of the Catechism than in all the learned books of 
sceptics and infidels. 

Knowledge, of course, a thorough knowledge of 
all theological science will not make faith, any more 
than wheels will make a cart. But a certain knowledge 
is essential, and its absence is fatal to faith. There 
are the simple ignorant who have forgotten their 
Catechism and leave the church before the instruction, 
for fear they might learn somethmg; who never read 
anything pertaining to religion, who would be ashamed 
to be detected with a religious book or paper in their 
hands. Then, there are the learned ignorant, such as 
our public schools turn out in great numbers each 
year ; who, either are above mere religious knowledge- 
seeking and disdain all that smacks of church and 
faith ; or, knowing little or nothing at all, imagine they 
possess a world of theological lore and know all that 
is knowable. These latter are the more to be pitied, 
their ignorance doubling back upon itself, as it were. 
When a man does not realize his own ignorance, his 
case is well nigh hopeless. 

If learning cannot give faith, neither can it alone 
preserve it. Learned men, pillars of the Church have 



94 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



fallen away. Pride, you will say. Yes, of course, 
pride is the cause of all evil. But we have all our 
share of it. If it works less havoc in some than 
in others, that is because pride is or is not kept within 
bounds. It is necessarily fatal to faith only when it 
is not controlled by prayer and the helps of practical 
religion. God alone can preserve our faith. He will 
do it only at our solicitation. 

If, therefore, some have not succeeded in keeping 
the demon of pride under restraint, it is because they 
refused to consider their faith a pure gift of God that 
cannot be safely guarded without God's grace ; or they 
forgot that God's grace is assured to no man who does 
not pray. The man who thinks he is all-sufficient unto 
himself in matters of religion, as in all other matters, 
is in danger of being brought to a sense of his own 
nothingness in a manner not calculated to be agreeable. 
No man who practised humble prayer ever lost his 
faith, or ever can; for to him grace is assured. 

And since faith is nothing if not practical, since 
it is a habit, it follows that irreligion, neglect to 
practise what we believe will destroy that habit. People 
who neglect their duty often complain that they have 
no taste for religion, cannot get interested, find no 
consolation therein. This justifies further neglect. 
They make a pretence to seek the cause. The cause 
is lack of faith; the fires of God's grace are burning 
low in their souls. They will soon go out unless they 
are furnished with fuel in the shape of good, solid, 
practical religion. That is their only salvation. 
Ignorance, supplemented by lack of prayer and practice, 
goes a long way in the destruction of faith in any 
soul, for two essentials are deficient. 

Disorder, too, is responsible for the loss of much 
faith. Luther and Henry might have retained their 
faith in spite of their pride, but they were lewd, and 
avaricious ; and there is small indulgence for such 
within the Church. Not but that we are all human, 
and sinners are the objects of the Church's greatest 



HOW FAITH MAY BE LOST. 



95 



solicitude; but within her pale no man^ be he king 
or genius, can sit down and feast his passions and 
expect her to wink at it and call it by another name 
than its own. The law of God and of t e Church 
is a thorn in the flesh of the vicious man. The authority 
of the Church is a sword of Damocles held perpetually 
over his head — until it is removed. Many a one denies 
God in a moment of sin in order to take the sting of 
remorse out of it. One gets tired of tne importunities 
of religion that tell us not to sin, to confess if we do 
sin. 

When you meet a pervert who, with a glib tongue, 
protests that his conscience drove him from the 
Church, that his enslaved intelligence needed deliver- 
ance, search him and you will find a skeleton in his 
closet; and if you do not find it, it is there just the 
same. A renegade priest some years ago, held forth 
before a gaping audience, at great length, on the 
reasons of his leaving the Church. A farmer sitting 
on the last bench listened patiently to his profound 
argumentation. When the lecturer was in the middle 
of his twelfthly, the other arose and shouted to him 
across the hall : "Cut it short, and say you wanted a 
wife." The heart has reasons which the reason does 
not understand. 

Not always, but frequently, ignorance, neglect 
and vice come to this. The young, the weak and the 
proud nave to guard themselves against these dangers. 
They work slowly, imperceptibly, but surely. Two 
things increase the peril and tend to precipitate 
matters ; reading and companionship. The ignorant 
are often anxious to know the other side, when they 
do not know their own. The consequence is that they 
will not understand fully the question ; and if they do, 
will not be able to resolve the difficulty. They are 
handicapped by their ignorance and can only make a 
mess out of it. The result is that they are caught by 
sophistries like a fly in a web. 

The company of those who believe differently, or 



96 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



not at all, is also pernicious to unenlightened and weak 
faith. The example in itself is potent for evil. The 
Catholic is usually not a persona grata as a Catholic 
but for some quality he possesses. Consequently, he 
must hide his religion under the bushel for fear of 
offending. Then a sneer, a gibe, a taunt are unpleasant 
things, and will be avoided even at the price of what 
at other times would look like being ashamed of one's 
faith. If ignorant, he will be silent; if he has not 
prayed, he will be weak; if vicious, he will be 
predisposed to fall. 

If we would guard the precious deposit of faith 
secure against any possible emergency, we must 
enlighten it, we must strengthen it, we must live up 
to it. 



CHAPTER XXVI. 
HOPE. 

The First Commandment bids us hope as well as 
believe in God. Our trust and confidence in His 
mercy to give us eternal life* and the means to obtain 
it, — this is our hope, founded on our belief that God 
is what He reveals Himself to us, able and willing to 
do by us as we would have Him do. Hope is the 
flower of our faith ; faith is the substance of the things 
we hope for. 

To desire and to hope are not one and the same 
thing. We may long for what is impossible of 
obtaining, while hope always supposes this possibility, 
better, a probability, nay, even a moral certitude. This 
expectation remains hope until it comes to the fruition 
of the things hoped for. 



HOPE. 



97 



The desire of general happiness is anchored in 
the human heart, deep down in the very essence of our 
being. We all desire to be happy. We may be free 
in many things; in this we are not free. We must 
have happiness, greater than the present, happiness 
of one kind or another, real or apparent. We may 
have different notions of this happiness; we desire 
it according to our notions. Life itself is one, long, 
painful, unsatisfied desire. 

When that desire is centered in God and the soul's 
salvation, it incontinently becomes hope, for then we 
have real beatitude before us, and all may obtain it. 
It can be true hope only when founded on faith. 

Not only is hope easy, natural, necessary, but it 
is essential to life. It is the mainspring of all activity. 
It keeps all things moving, and without it life would 
not be worth living. If men did not think they could 
get what they are striving after, they would sit down, 
fold their arms, let the world move, but they wouldn't. 

Especially is Christian hope absolutely necessary 
for the leading of a Christian life, and no man would 
take upon himself that burden, if he did not confidently 
expect a crown of glory beyond, sufficient to repay him 
for all the things endured here below for conscience's 
sake. Hope is a star that beckons us on to renewed 
effort, a vision of the goal that animates and 
invigorates us ; it is also a soothing balm to the wounds 
we receive in the struggle. 

To be without this hope is the lowest level to 
which man may descend. St. Paul uses the term 
"men without hope" as the most stinging reproach 
he could inflict upon the dissolute pagans. 

To have abandoned hope is a terrible misfortune 
— despair. This must not be confounded with an 
involuntary perturbation, a mere instinctive dread, a 
phantasmagoric illusion that involves no part of the 
will. It is not even an excessive fear that goes by the 
name of pusillanimity. It is a cool judgment like that 



98 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



of Cain: "My sin is too great that I should expect 
forgiveness." 

He who despairs, loses sight of God's mercy and 
sees only His stern, rigorous justice. After hatred of 
God, this is perhaps the greatest injury man can do 
to his Master, who is Love. There has always been 
more of mercy than of justice in His dealings with 
men. We might say of Him that He is all mercy in 
this world, to be all justice in the next. Therefore 
while there is life, there is hope. 

The next abomination is to hope, but to place our 
supreme happiness in that which should not be the 
object of our hope. Men live for pleasures, riches, 
and honors, as though these things were worthy of 
our highest aspirations, as though they could satisfy 
the unappeasable appetite of man for happiness. 
Greater folly thaei this can no man be guilty of. He 
takes the dross for the pure gold, the phantom for the 
reality. Few men theoretically belong to this class ; 
practically it has the vast majority. 

The presumptuous are those who hope to obtain 
the prize and do nothing to deserve it. He who would 
hope to fly without wings, to walk without feet, to 
live without air or food would be less a fool than he 
who hopes to save his soul without fulfiling the 
conditions laid down by Him who made us. There 
is no wages without service, no reward without merit, 
no crown without a cross. 

This fellow's mistake is to bank too much on 
God's mercy, leaving His justice out of the bargain 
altogether. Yet God is one as well as the other, and 
both equally. The offense to God consists in making 
Him a being without any backbone, so to speak, a soft, 
incapable judge, whose pity degenerates into weakness. 
And certainly it is a serious offense. 

No, hope should be sensible and reasonable. It 
must keep the middle between tv/o extremes. The 
measure of our hope should reasonably be the measure 
of our efforts, for he who wishes the end wishes the 



HOPE. 



99 



means. Of course God will make due allowances for 
our frailties, but that is His business, not ours; and 
we have no right to say just how far that mercy will 
go. Even though we lead the lives of saints, we shall 
stand in need of much mercy. Prudence tells us to 
do all things as though it all depended upon us alone ; 
then God will make up for the deficiencies. 



CHAPTER XXVn. 

LOVE OF GOD. 

Once upon a time, there lived people who 
pretended that nothing had existence outside the mind, 
that objects were merely fictions of the brain; thus, 
when they gave a name to those objects, it was like 
sticking a label in the air where they seemed to be. 
The world is not without folks who have similar ideas 
concerning charity, to whom it is a name without 
substance. Scarcely a Christian but will pretend that 
he has the virtue of charity, and of course one must 
take his word for it, and leave his actions and conduct 
out of all consideration. With him, to love God is 
to say you do, whether you really do or not. This 
is charity of the "sounding brass and tinkling cymbal" 
assortment. 

To be honest about it, charity or love of God is 
nothing more or less, practically, than freedom from, 
and avoidance of, mortal sin. "If any one say, *I love 
God' and hates his brother, (or otherwise sins) he is 
a liar." Strong language, but straight to the point! 
The state of grace is the first, fundamental, and 
essential condition to the existence of charity. Charity 



L'jfG. 



100 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



and mortal sin are two things irreducibly opposed, 
uncompromisingly antagonistic, eternally inimical. 
There is no charity where there is sin; there is no 
sin where there is charity. That is why charity is 
called the fulfilment of the law. 

On the other hand, it sometimes happens that 
humble folks of the world, striving against temptation 
and sin to serve the Master, imagine they can hardly 
succeed. True, they rarely offend and to no great 
extent of malice, but they envy the lot of others more 
advantageously situated, they think, nearer by talent 
and state to perfection, basking in the sunshine of 
God's love. Talent, position, much exterior activity, 
much supposed goodness, are, in their eyes, titles to the 
kingdom, and infallible signs of charity. And then 
they foolishly deplore their own state as far removed 
from that perfection, because forsooth their minds are 
uncultured, their faith simple, and their time taken 
up with the drudgery of life. 

They forget that not this gift or that work or 
anything else is necessary. One thing alone is 
necessary, and that is practical love of God. Nothing 
counts without it. And the sage over his books, the 
wonder-worker at his task, the apostle in his wander- 
ings and labors, the very martyr on the rack is no more 
sure of having charity than the most humble man, 
woman or child in the lowest walks of life who loves 
God too much to offend Him. It is not necessary to 
have the tongues of men and angels, or faith that will 
move mountains, or the fortitude of martyrs ; charity 
expressed in our lives and deeds rates higher than 
these. 

A thing is good in the eyes of its maker if it 
accomplishes that for which it was made. A watch 
that does not tell time, a knife that does not cut, and 
a soul that does not love God are three utterly useless 
things. And why? Because they are no good for what 
they were made. The watch exists solely to tell the 
hour, the blade to cut and the soul to love and serve 



LOVE OF GOD. 



lOI 



its Maker. Failing in this, there is no more reason 
for their being. Their utiUty ceasing, they themselves 
cease to exist to a certain extent, for a thing is really 
no longer what it was, when it fails to execute that for 
which it came into being. 

Charity, in a word, amounts to this, that we love 
God, but to the extent of not offending Him. Anything 
that falls short of such affection is something other 
than charity, no matter how many tags and labels it 
may wear. If I beheld a brute strike down an aged 
parent, I would not for a moment think that affection 
was behind that blow ; and I could not conceive how 
there could be a spark of filial love in that son's heart 
until he had atoned for his crime. Now love is not 
one thing when directed towards God, and another 
where man is concerned. 

The great hypocrisy of life consists in this that 
people make an outward showing of loving God, 
because they know full well that it is their first duty ; 
yet, for all that, they do not a whit mend their ways, 
and to sin costs them nothing. They varnish it over 
with an appearance of honesty and decency, and fair- 
minded men take them for what they appear to be, 
and should be, and they pass for such. These watches 
are pretty to look upon, beautiful, magnificent, but 
they are stopped, the interior is out of order, the 
main-spring is broken, the hands that run across the 
face lie. These blades are bright and handsome, but 
they are dull, blunt, full of nicks, good enough for 
coarse and vulgar work, but useless for the fine, 
delicate work for which they were made. 

The master mechanic and artist of our souls, who 
wants trustworthy timepieces and keen blades, will 
not be deceived by these gaudy trinkets, and will reject 
them. Others may esteem you for this or that quality, 
admire this or that qualification you possess, be taken 
with their superficial gloss and accidental usefulness. 
The quality required by Him who made you is that your 
soul be filled with charity, and proven by absence of sin. 



CHAPTER XXVIII. 



LOVE OF NEIGHBOR. 

The precept, written in our hearts, as well as in 
the law, to love God, commands us, at the same time, 
to love the neighbor. When you go to confession, you 
are told to be sorry for your sins and to make a firm 
purpose of amendment. These appear to be two 
different injunctions; yet in fact and reality, they are 
one and the same thing, for it is impossible to abhor 
and detest sin, having at the same moment the intention 
of committing it. One therefore includes the other; 
one is not sincere and true without the other ; therefore 
one cannot be without the other. So it is with love 
of God and of the neighbor; these two parts of one 
precept are coupled together because they complete 
each other, and they amount practically to the same 
thing. 

The neighbor we are to love is not alone those 
for whom we naturally have affection, such as parents, 
friends, benefactors, etc., whom it is easy to love. But 
our neighbor is all mankind, those far and those near, 
those who have blessed us and those who have wronged 
us, the enemy as well as the friend ; all who have 
within them, as we have, the image and likeness of 
God. No human being can we put outside the pale of 
neighborly love. 

As for the love we bear others, it is of course one 
in substance, but it may be different in degree and 
various in quality. It may be more or less tender, 
intense, emphatic. Some we love more, others, less; 
yet for all that, we love them. It is impossible for us 
to have towards any other being the same feelings 
we entertain for a parent. The love a good Christian 



LOVE OF NEIGHBOR. 



103 



bears towards a stranger is not the love he bears 
towards a good friend. The love therefore that charity 
demands admits a variety of shades without losing its 
character of love. 

When it comes to loving certain ones of our 
neighbors, the idea is not of the most welcome. What ! 
Must I love, really love, that low rascal, that 
cantankerous fellow, that repugnant, repulsive being? 
Or this other who has wronged me so maliciously? 
Or that proud, overbearing creature who looks down 
on me and despises me? 

We have said that love has its degrees, its ebb 
and flow tide, and still remains love. The low water 
mark is this: that we refuse not to pray for such 
neighbors, that we speak not ill of them, that we refuse 
not to salute them, or to do them a good turn, or to 
return a favor. A breach in one of these common 
civilities, due to every man from his fellow-man, may 
constitute a degree of hatred directly opposed to the 
charity strictly required of us. 

It is not however necessary to go on doing these 
things all during life and at all moments of life. These 
duties are exterior, and are required as often as a 
contrary bearing would betoken a lack of charity in 
the heart. Just as we are not called upon to embrace 
and hug an uninviting person as a neighbor, neither 
are we obliged to continue our civilities when we find 
that they are offensive and calculated to cause trouble. 
But naturally there must be charity in the heart. 

We should not confound uncharity with a sort of 
natural repugnance and antipathy, instinctive to some 
natures, betraying a weakness of character, if you 
will, but hardly what one could call a clearly defined 
fault. There are people who can forgive more easily 
than forget and who succeed only after a long while 
in overcoming strong feelings. In consequence of this 
state of mind, and in order to maintain peace and 
concord, they prefer the absence to the presence of the 
objects of their antipathy. Of course, to nourish this 



104 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



feeling is sinful to a degree ; but while striving against 
it, to remove prudently all occasions of opening afresh 
the wound, if we act honestly, this does not seem 
to have any uncharitable malice. 

Now all this is not charity unless the idea of God 
enter therein. There is no charity outside the idea of 
God. Philanthropy, humanity is one thing, charity 
is another. The one is sentiment, the other is love — 
two very different things. The one supposes natural 
motives, the other, supernatural. Philanthropy looks 
at the exterior form and discovers a likeness to self. 
Charity looks at the soul and therein discovers an 
image of God, by which we are not only common 
children of Adam, but also children of God and 
sharers of a common celestial inheritance. Neither 
a cup of water nor a fortune given in any other name 
than that of God is charity. 

There are certain positive works of charity, such 
as almsgiving and brotherly correction, etc., that may 
be obligatory upon us to a degree of serious respon- 
sibility. We must use prudence and intelligence in 
discerning these obligations, but once they clearly 
stand forth they are as binding on us as obligations 
of justice. We are our brothers' keepers, especially 
of those whom misfortune oppresses and whose lot is 
cast under a less lucky star. 



CHAPTER XXIX. 
PRAYER. 

No word so common and familiar among 
Christians as prayer. Religion itself is nothing more 
than a vast, mighty, universal, never ceasing prayer. 
Our churches are monuments of prayer and houses of 



PRAYER. 



105 



prayer. Our worship, our devotions, our ceremonies 
are expressions of prayer^ Our sacred music is a 
prayer. The incense, /ising in white clouds before 
the altar, is symbolical of prayer. And the one accent 
that is dinned into our ears from altar and pulpit is 
prayer. 

Prayer is the life of the Christian as work is the 
life of the man; without one and the other we would 
starve spiritually and physically. If we live well, it 
is because we pray ; if we lead sinful lives, it is because 
we neglect to pray. Where prayer is, there is virtue ; 
where prayer is unknown, there is sin. The 
atmosphere of piety, sanctity, and honesty is the 
atmosphere of prayer. 

Strange that the nature and necessity of prayer 
are so often misunderstood ! Yet the definition in our 
Catechism is clear and precise. There are four kinds 
of prayer ; adoration, thanksgiving, petition for pardon, 
and for our needs, spiritual and bodily. 

One need be neither a Catholic nor a Christian 
to see how becoming it is in us to offer to God our 
homage of adoration and thanksgiving ; it is necessary 
only to believe in a God who made us and who is 
infinitely perfect. Why, the very heathens made gods 
to adore, and erected temples to thank them, so deep 
was their sense of the devotion they owed the Deity. 
They put the early Christians to death because the 
latter refused to adore their gods. Everywhere you 
go, under the sun, you will find the creature offering 
to the Creator a homage of worship. 

He, therefore, who makes so little of God as to 
forget to adore and thank Him becomes inferior to the 
verv pagans who, sunk in the darkness of corruption 
and superstition as they were, did not, however, forget 
their first and natural duty to the Maker. Neglect 
of this obligation in a man betravs an absence, a loss 
of religious instinct, and an irreligious man is a pure 
animal, if he is a refined one. His refinement and 



io6 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



superiority come from his intelligence, and these 
qualities, far from attenuating his guilt, only serve 
to aggravate it. 

The brute eats and drinks ; when he is full and 
tired he throws himself down to rest. When refreshed, 
he gets up, shakes himself and goes off again in quest 
of food and amusement. In what does a man without 
prayer differ from such a being? 

But prayer, strictly speaking, means a demand, 
a petition, an asking. We ask for our needs and our 
principal needs are pardon and succor. This is pra3^er 
as it is generally understood. It is necessary to 
salvation. Without it no man can be saved. Our 
assurance of heaven should be in exact proportion to 
our asking. "Ask and you shall receive." Ask 
nothing, and you obtain nothing; and thait which you 
do not obtain is just what you must have to save your 
soul. 

Here is the explanation of it in a nutshell. The 
doctrine of the Church is that when God created man. 
He raised him from a natural to a supernatural state, 
and assigned to him a supernatural end. Supernatural 
means what is above the natural, beyond our natural 
powers of obtaining. Our destiny therefore cannot be 
fulfilled without the help of a superior power. We 
are utterly incapable by ourselves of realizing the end 
to which we are called. The condition absolutely 
required is the grace of God and through that akne 
can we expect to come to our appointed end. 

Here is a stone. That that stone should have 
feehng is not natural, but supernatural. God, to give 
sensation to that stone, must break through the natural 
order of things, because to feel is beyond the native 
powers of a stone. It is not natural for an animal to 
reason, it is impossible. God must work a miracle 
to make it understand. Well, the stone is just as 
capable of feeling, and the animal of reasoning, as is 
man capable of saving his soul by himself. 



PRAYER. 



To persevere in the state of grace and the 
friendship of God, to recover it when lost by sin, are 
supernatural works. Only by the grace of God can 
this be effected. Will God do this without being 
aisked? Say rather will God save us in spite of 
ourselves, or unknown to ourselves. He who does not 
ask gives no token of a desire to obtain. 



CHAPTER XXX, 
PETITIONS. 

For all spiritual needs, therefore, prayer is the 
one thing necessary. I am in the state of sin. I 
desire to be forgiven. To obtain pardon is a 
supernatural act. Alone I can no more do it than fly. 
I pray then for the grace of a good confession — I 
prudently think myself in the state of grace. Were 
I for a moment left to my depraved nature, to the 
mercy of my passions, I should fall into the lowest 
depths of iniquity. The holiest, saintliest of men are 
just as capable of the greatest abominations as the 
blackest sinner that ever lived. If he does not fall, 
and the other does, it is because he prays and the 
other does not. 

Some people have certain spiritual maladies, that 
become second nature to them, called dominant 
passions. For one, it is cursing and swearing; for 
another vanity and conceit. One is afflicted with sloth, 
another with uncleanness of one kind or another. To 
discover the failing is the first duty, to pray against 
it is the next. You attack it with prayer as you attack 
a disease with remedies. And if we only used prayer 
with half the care, perseverance and confidence that 
we use medicines, out spiritual distemper would be 
short-lived. 



io8 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



A person who passes a considerable time without 
prayer is usually in a bad state of soul. There is 
probably no one, who, upon reflection, will fail to 
discover that his best days were those which his 
prayers sanctified, and his worst, those which had to 
get along without any. And when a man starts out 
badly, the first thing he takes care to do is to neglect 
his prayers. For praying is an antidote and a 
reminder; it makes him feel uneasy while in sin, and 
would make him break with his evil ways if 
he continued to pray. And since he does not wish 
to stop, he takes no chances, and gives up his prayers. 
When he wants to stop, he fails back on his prayers. 

This brings us to the bodily favors we should ask 
for. You are sick. You desire to get well, but you 
do not see the sense of praying for it; for you say, 
"Either I shall get well or I shall not." For an 
ordinary statement that is as plain and convincing as 
one has a right to expect; it will stand against all 
argument. But the conclusion is not of a piece with 
the premises. In that case why do you call in the 
physician, why do you take nasty pills and 
swallow whole quarts of vile concoctions that 
have the double merit of bringing distress to your 
palate and your purse? You take these precautions 
because your most elementary common sense tells you 
that such precautions as medicaments, etc., enter for 
something of a condition in the decree of God which 
reads that you shall die or not die. Your return to 
health or your shuffling oflF of the mortal coil is subject 
to conditions of prudence, and according as they are 
fulfiled or not fulfiled the decree of God will go into 
effect one way or the other. 

And why does not your sane common sense 
suggest to you that prayer enters as just such a 
condition in the decrees of God, that your recovery is 
just as conditional on the using of prayer as to the 
taking of pills? 

There are people who have no faith in drugs. 



PETITIONS. 



109 



either because they have never used any or because 
having once used them, failed to get immediate relief. 
Appreciation of the efficacy of prayer is frequently 
based on similar experience. 

To enumerate all the cures effected by prayer 
would be as bootless as to rehearse ail the miracles of 
therapeutics and surgery. The doctor says: "Here, 
take this, it will do you ^ood. I know its virtue." The 
Church says likewise : "Try prayer, I know its virtue." 
Your faith in it has all to do with its successful 
working. 

As in bodily sickness, so it is in all the other 
afflictions that flesh is heir to. Prayer is a panacea; 
it cures all ills. But it should be taken with two tonics, 
as it were, before and after. Before: faith and 
confidence in the power of God to cure us through 
prayer. After: resignation to the will of God, by 
which we accept what it may please Him to do in our 
case; for health is not the greatest boon of life, nor 
are sickness and death the greatest evils. Sin alone is 
bad ; the grace of God alone is good. All other things 
God uses as means in view of this supreme good and 
against this supreme evil. Faith prepares the system 
and puts it in order for the reception of the remedy. 
Resignation helps it work out its good effects, and 
brings out all its virtue. 

Thus prayer is necessary to us all, whether we be 
Christians or pagans, whether just or sinners, whether 
sick or well. It brings us near to God, and God near 
to us, and thus is a foretaste and an image of our 
union with Him hereafter. 



CHAPTER XXXI. 



RELIGION. 

As far back as the light of history extends, it 
shows man, of every race a^d of every cHme, occupied 
in giving expression, in one way or another, to his 
religious impressions, sentiments, and convictions. He 
knew God; he was influenced by this knowledge 
unto devotion ; and sought to exteriorize this devotion 
for the double purpose of proving its truth and sin- 
cerity, and of still further nourishing, strengthening, 
safeguarding it by means of an external worship and 
sensible things. Accordingly, he built temples, erected 
altars, offered sacrifices, burnt incense; he sang and 
wept, feasted and fasted ; he knelt^ stood and prostrated 
himself — all things in harmony with his hopes and 
fears. This is worship or cult. We call it religion, 
distinct from interior worship or devotion, but sup- 
posing the latter essentially. It is commanded by the 
first precept of God. 

He who contents himself with a simple acknowl- 
edgment of the Divinity in the heart, and confines his 
piety to the realm of the soul, does not fulfil the first 
commandment. The obligation to worship God was 
imposed, not upon angels — pure spirits, but upon 
men — creatures composed of a body as well as a 
soul. The homage that He had a right to expect was 
therefore not a purely spiritual one, but one in which 
the body had a part as well as the soul. A man is not 
a man without ai body. Neither can God be satisfied 
with man's homage unless his physical being cooper- 
ate with his spiritual, unless his piety be translated 
into acts and become religion, in the sense in which 
we use the word. 



RELIGION. 



Ill 



There is no limit to the different forms rehgion 
may take on ais manifestations of intense fervor and 
strong belief. Sounds, attitudes, practices, etc., are 
so many vehicles of expression, and may be multiplied 
indefinitely. They become letters and words and 
figures of a language which, while being conventional 
in a way, is also natural and imitative, and speaks 
more clearly and eloquently and poetically than any 
other human language. This is what makes the Cath- 
olic religion so beautiful as to compel the admiration 
of believers and unbelievers alike. 

« Of course, there is nothing to prevent an individ- 
ual from making religion a mask of hypocrisy. If 
in using these practices, he does not mean what they 
imply, he lies as plainly as if he used words without 
regard for their signification. These practices, too, 
ma/y become absurd, ridiculous and even abominable. 
When this occurs, it is easily explained by the fact 
that the mind and heart of man are never proof 
against imbecility and depravity. There are as many 
fools and cranks in the world as there are villains and 
degenerates. 

The Church of God regulates divine worship for 
us with the wisdom and experience of centuries. Her 
sacrifice is the first great act of worship. Then there 
are her ceremonies, rites, and observances ; the use of 
holy water, blessed candles, ashes, incense, vestments ; 
her chants, and fasts and feasts, the symbolism of her 
sacraments. This is the language in which, as a 
Church, and in union with her children, she speaks to 
God her adoration, praise and thanksgiving. This is 
her religion, and we practice it by availing ourselves 
of these things and by respecting them as pertaining 
to God. 

We are sometimes branded as idolaters, that is, as 
people who adore another or others than God. We 
offer our homage of adoration to God who is in heaven, 
and to that same God whom we believe to be on our 



112 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



altars. Looking through Protestant spectacles, we cer- 
tainly are idolaters, for we adore what they consider a« 
simple bread. In this light we plead guilty; but is 
it simple bread? That is the question. The homage 
we offer to everything and everybody else is relative, 
that is, it refers to God, and therefore is not idolatry. 

As to whether or not we are superstitious in our 
practices, that depends on what is the proper homage 
to offer God and in what does excess consist. It is 
not a little astonishing to see the no-creed, dogma- 
hating, private- judgment sycophants sitting in judg- 
ment against us and telling us what is and what is not 
correct in our religious practices. We thought that 
sort of a thing — dogmatism — was excluded from 
Protestant ethics ; that every one should be allowed 
to choose his own mode of worship, that the right and 
proper way is the way one thinks right and proper. 
If the private-interpreter claims this freedom for him- 
self, why not allow it to us! We thought they 
objected to this kind of interference in us some few 
hundred years ago ; is it too much if we object most 
strenuously to it in them in these days ! It is strange 
how easily some people forget first principles, and 
what a rare article on the market is consistency. 

The persons, places and things that pertain to the 
exterior worship of God we are bound to respect, not 
for themselves, but by reason of the usage for which 
they are chosen and set aside, thereby becoming conse- 
crated, religious. We should respect them in a spirit- 
ual way as we respect in a human way all that belongs 
to those whom we hold dear. Irreverence or disre- 
spect is a profanation, a sacrilege. 



CHAPTER XXXII. 



DEVOTIONS. 

There is in the Church an abundance and a rich 
variety of what we call devotions — practices that 
express our respect, affection and veneration for the 
chosen friends of God. These devotions we should 
be careful not to confound with a thing very differ- 
ently known as devotion — to God Himself. This 
latter is the soul, the very essence of religion; the 
former are sometimes irreverently spoken of as 
"frills." 

Objectively speaking, these devotions find their 
justification in the dogma of the Communion of Saints, 
according to which we believe that the blessed in 
heaven are able and disposed to help the unfortunate 
here below. Subjectively they are based on human 
nature itself. In our self-conscious weakness and 
unworthiness, we choose instinctively to approach the 
throne of God through His tried and faithful friends 
rather than to hazard ourselves alone and helpless in 
His presence. 

Devotion, as all know, is only another name for 
charity towards God, piety, holiness, that is, a condi- 
tion of soul resulting from, and at the same time, 
conducive to, fidelity to God's law and the dictates of 
one's conscience. It consists in a proper understand- 
ing of our relations to God — creatures of the Creator, 
paupers, sinners and children in the presence of a 
Benefactor, Judge and Father ; and in sympathies and 
sentiments aroused in us by, and corresponding with, 
these convictions. In other words, one is devoted to 
a friend when one knows him well, is true as steel to 
him, and basks in the sunshine of a love that requires 
that fidelity. Towards God, this is devotion. 



114 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Devotions differ in pertaining, not directly, but 
indirectly through the creature to God. No one but 
sees at once that devotion, in a certain degree is 
binding upon all men ; a positive want of it is nothing 
short of impiety. But devotions have not the dignity 
of entering into the essence of God-worship. They 
are not constituent parts of that flower that grows in 
God's garden of the soul — charity ; they are rather the 
scent and fragrance that linger around its petals and 
betoken its genuine quality. They are of counsel, so 
to speak, as opposed to the precept of charity and 
devotion. They are outside all commandment, and 
are taken up with a view of doing something more 
than escaping perdition "quasi per ignem." 

For human nature is rarely satisfied with what is 
rigorously sufficient. It does not relish living per- 
petually on the ragged edge of a scant, uncertain 
meagerness. People want enough and plenty, abun- 
dance and variety. If there are many avenues that lead 
to God's throne, they want to use them. li there are 
many outlets for their intense fervor and abundant 
generosity, they will have them. Devotions answer 
these purposes. 

Impossible to enumerate all the diiferent practices 
that are in vogue in the Church and go under the name 
of devotions. Legion is the number of saints that have 
their following of devotees. Some are universal, are 
praised and invoked the world over ; others have a 
local niche and are all unknown beyond the confines 
of a province or nation. Some are invoked in all 
needs and distresses ; St. Blase, on the other hand 
is credited with a special power for curing throats, St. 
Anthony, for finding lost things, etc. Honor is paid 
them on account of their proximity to God. To invoke 
them is as much an honor to them as an advantage 
to us. 

If certain individuals do not like this kind of a 
thing, they are under no sort of an obligation to prac- 



DEVOTIONS. 



tise it. If they can get to heaven without the assist- 
ance of the saints, then let them do so, by all means ; 
only let them be sure to get there. No one finds 
devotions repugnant but those who are ignorant of 
their real character and meaning. If they are fortu- 
nate enough to make this discovery, they then, like 
nearly all converts, become enthusiastic devotees, find- 
ing in their devotions new beauties, and new advan- 
tages every day. 

And it is a poor Catholic that leaves devotions 
entirely alone, and a rare one. He may not feel 
inclined to enlist the favor of this or that particular 
saint, but he usually has a rosary hidden a-way some- 
where in his vest pocket and a scapular around his 
neck, or in his pocket, as a last extreme. If he scorns 
even this, then the chances are that he is Catholic 
only in name, for the tree of faith is such a> fertile 
one that it rarely fails to yield fruit and flowers of 
exquisite fragrance. 

Oh! of course the lives of all the saints are not 
history in the strictest sense of the word. But what 
has that to do with the Communion of Saints? If 
simplicity and naivete have woven around some names 
an unlikely tale, a fable or a myth, it requires some 
effort to see how that could affect their standing with 
God, or their disposition to help us in our needs. 

Devotions are not based on historical facts, 
although in certain facts, events or happenings, real or 
alleged, they may have been furnished with occasions 
for coming into existence. The authenticity of these 
facts is not guaranteed by the doctrinal authority of 
the Church, but she may, and does, approve the devo- 
tions that spring therefrom. Independently of the 
truth of private and individual revelations, visions and 
miracles, which she investigates as to their probability, 
she makes sure that there is nothing contrary to the 
deposit of faith and to morals, and then she gives 
these devotions the stamp of her approval as a 



ii6 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



security to the faithful who wish to practise them. A 
CathoHc or non-Catholic may think what he likes con- 
cerning the apparitions of the Virgin at Lourdes ; if 
he is dense enough, he may refuse to believe that 
miracles have been performed there. But he cannot 
deny that the homage offered to Our Lady at Lourdes, 
and known as devotion to Our Lady of Lourdes, is in 
keeping with religious worship as practised by the 
Church and in consonance with reason enlightened by 
faith, and so with all other devotions. 

A vase of flowers, a lamp, a burning candle 
before the statue of a saint is a prayer whose silence 
is more eloquent than all the sounds that ever came 
from the lips of man. It is love that puts it there, love 
that tells it to dispense its sweet perfume or shed its 
mellow rays, and love that speaks by this touching 
symbolism to God through a favorite saint. 



CHAPTER XXXIIL 
IDOLATRY AND SUPERSTITION. 

The first and greatest sinner against religion is 
the idolater, who offers God-worship to others than 
God. There are certain attributes that belong to God 
alone, certain titles that He alone has a right to bear, 
certain marks of veneration that are due to Him alone. 
To ascribe these to any being under God is an abomi- 
nation, and is called idolatry. 

The idols of paganism have long since been 
thrown, their temples destroyed; the folly itself has 
fallen into disuse, and its extravagances serve only 
in history "to point a moral or adorn a tale." Yet, in 
truth, idolatry is not so dead as all that, if one would 



IDOLATRY AND SUPERSTITION. 



117 



take the pains to peruse a few pages of the current 
erotic literature wherein people see heaven in a pair 
of blue eyes, catch inspired words from ruby lips and 
adore a well trimmed chin-whisker. I would sooner, 
with the old-time Egyptians, adore a well-behaved cat 
or a toothsome cucumber than^ with certain modern 
feather-heads and gum-drop hearts, sing hymns to a 
shapely foot or dimpled cheek and offer incense to 
''divinities," godlike forms, etc. The way hearts and 
souls are thrown around from one to another is sug- 
gestive of the national game ; while the love they bear 
one another is always infinite, supreme, without 
parallel on earth or in heaven. 

No, perhaps they do not mean what they say ; but 
that helps matters very little, for the fault lies pre- 
cisely in saying what they do say ; the language used 
is idolatrous. And a queer thing about it is that they 
do mean more than half of what they say. When 
degenerate love runs riot, it dethrones the Almighty, 
makes gods of clay and besots itself before them. 

What is superstition and what is a superstitious 
practice? It is something against the virtue of 
religion; it sins, not by default as unbeHef, but by 
excess. Now, to be able to say what is excessive, one 
must know what is right and just, one must have a 
measure. To attempt to qualify anything as excessive 
without the aid of a rule or measure is simply guess- 
work. 

The Yankee passes for a mighty clever guesser, 
outpointing with ease his transatlantic cousin. Over 
there the sovereign guesses officially that devotion 
to the Mother of God is a superstitious practice. This 
reminds one of the overgrown farmer boy, who, when 
invited by his teacher to locate the center of a circle 
drawn on the blackboard, stood off and eyed the figure 
critically for a moment with a wise squint ; and then 
said, pointing his finger to the middle or thereabouts: 
"I should jedge it to be about thar'." He was candid 



ii8 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



enough to offer only an opinion. But how the royal 
guesser could be sure enough to swear it, and that 
officially, is what staggers plain people. 

Now right reason is a rule by which to judge 
what is and what is not superstitious. But individual 
reason or private judgment and right reason are not 
synonyms in the English or in any other language 
that is human. When reasoning men disagree, right 
reason, as far as the debated question is concerned, is 
properly said to be off on a vacation, a thing uncom- 
monly frequent in human affairs. In order, therefore 
that men should not be perpetually at war concerning 
matters that pertain to men's salvation, God estab- 
lished a competent authority which even simple folks 
with humble minds and pure hearts can find. In 
default of any adverse claimant the Catholic Church 
must be adjudged that authority. The worship, there- 
fore, that the Church approves as worthy of God is 
not, cannot be, superstition. And what is patently 
against reason, or, in case of doubt, what she reproves 
and condemns in religion is superstitious. 

Leaving out of the question for the moment those 
species of superstition that rise to the dignity of 
science, to the accidental fame and wealth of humbugs 
and frauds, the evil embraces a host of practices that 
are usually the result of a too prevalent psychological 
malady known as softening of the brain. These poor 
unfortunates imagine that the Almighty who holds the 
universe in the hollow of His hand^ deals with His 
creatures in a manner that would make a full-grown 
man pass as a fool if he did the same. Dreams, luck- 
pieces, certain combinations of numbers or figures, 
ordinary or extraordinary events and happenings — 
these are the means whereby God is made to reveal to 
men secrets and mysteries as absurd as the means 
themselves. Surely God must have descended from 
His throne of wisdom. 

Strange though it appear, too little religion — and 



IDOLATRY AND SUPERSTITION. 



119 



not too much — leads to these unholy follies. There 
is a religious instinct in man. True religion satisfies 
it fully. Quack religion, pious tomfoolery, and doc- 
trinal ineptitude foisted upon a God-hungry people 
end by driving some from one folly to another in a 
pitiful attempt to get away from the deceptions of man 
and near to God. Others are led on by a sinful curios- 
ity that outweighs their common-sense as well as their 
respect for God. These are the guilty ones. 

It has been said that there is more superstition — 
that is belief and dabbling in these inane practices — 
to-day in one of our large cities than the Dark Ages 
ever was afflicted with. If true, it is one sign of the 
world's spiritual unrest, the decay of unbelief; and 
irreligion thus assists at its own disintegration. The 
Church swept the pagan world clean of superstition 
once; she may soon be called upon to do the work 
over again. 



CHAPTER XXXIV. 

OCCULTISM. 

Spiritism as a theory, a science, a practice, a 
religion, or— I might add — a profitable business ven- 
ture, is considered an evil thing by the Church, and 
by her is condemned as superstition, that is, as a 
false and unworthy homage to God, belittling His 
majesty and opposed to the Dispensation of Christ, 
according to which alone God can be worthily 
honored. This evil has many names ; it includes all 
dabbling in the supernatural against the sanction of 



I20 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Church authority, and runs a whole gamut of "isms" 
from fake trance-mediums to downright diabolical 
possession. 

The craft found favor with the pagans and 
flourished many years before the Christian era. Won- 
drous things were wrougKt by the so-called pythonic 
spirit; evidently outside the natural order, still more 
evidently not by the agency of God, and of a certainty 
through the secret workings of the "Old Boy" him- 
self. It was called Necromancy, or the Black Art. 
It had attractions for the Jews and they yielded to 
some extent to the temptation of consulting the 
Python. For this reason Moses condemned the evil 
as an abomination. These are his words, taken from 
Deuteronomy : 

"Neither let there be found among you any one 
that consulteth soothsayers, or observeth dreams and 
omens ; neither let there be any wizard, nor charmer, 
nor any one that consulteth pythonic spirits or fortune 
tellers, or that seeketh the truth from the dead. For 
the Lord abhorreth all these things ; and for these 
a'bominations He will destroy them." 

The Black Art had its votaries during the Middle 
Ages and kept the Church busy warning the faithful 
against its dangers and its evils. Even so great a 
name as that of Albert the Great has been associated 
with the dafk doings of the wizard, because, no doubt, 
of the marvelous fruits of his genius and deep learn- 
ing, which the ignorant believed impossible to mere 
human agency. As witchcraft, it flourished during 
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The excesses 
to which it gave rise caused severe laws to be enacted 
against it and stringent measures were taken to sup- 
press it. Many were put to death, sometimes after 
the most cruel tortures. As is usually the case, the 
innocent suffered with the guilty. The history of the 
early New England settlers makes good reading on 
the subject. 



OCCULTISM. 



121 



Some people claim that the spiritism of to-day 
is only a revival of old-time witchery and necromancy, 
that it is as prevalent now as it was then, perhaps 
more prevalent. *'Only," as Father Lambert remarks, 
"the witch of to-day instead of going to the stake as 
formerly, goes about as Madam So-and-So, and is 
duly advertised in our enlightened press as the great 
and renowned seeress or clairvoyant, late from the 
court of the Akoorid of Swat, more recently from 
the Sublime Porte, where she was in consultation 
with the Sultan of Turkey, and more recently still 
from the principal courts of Europe. As her stay in 
the city will be brief, those who wish to know the 
past or future or wish to communicate with deceased 
friends, are advised to call on her soon. Witchcraft 
is as prevalent as it ever was, and the witches are 
as real. They may not have cats on their shoulders 
or pointed caps, or broomsticks for quick transit, but 
they differ from the witches of the past only in being 
liberally paid, instead of liberally punished." 

The Church does not deny the possibility of in- 
tercourse between the living and the souls of the dead ; 
she goes farther and admits the fact that such inter- 
course has taken place, pointing, as well she may, to 
the Scriptures themselves wherein such facts are re- 
corded. The lives of her saints are not without proof 
that this world may communicate with the unknown. 
And this belief forms the groundwork, furnishes the 
basic principles, of Spiritism. 

Nevertheless, the Church condemns all attempts 
at establishing such communication between the liv- 
ing and the dead, or even claiming, though falsely, 
such intercourse. If this is done in the name of 
religion, she considers it an insult to God, Who 
thereby is trifled with and tempted to a miraculous 
manifestation of Himself outside the ordinary chan- 
nels of revelation. As an instrument of mere human 
curiosity, it is criminal, since it seeks to subject Him 



122 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



to the beck and call of a creature. In case such 
practices succeed, there is the grave danger of being 
mislead and deceived by the evil spirit, who is often 
permitted, as the instrument of God, to punish guilty 
men. When resorted to, as a means of relieving fools 
of their earnings, it is sacrilegious ; and those who 
support such impious humbugs can be excused from 
deadly sin only on the grounds of lunacy. 

Hypnotism and Mesmerism differ from Spiritism 
in this, that their disciples account for the phenomena 
naturally and lay no claim to supernatural interven- 
tion. They produce a sleep in the subject, eitlier as 
they claim, by the emanation of a subtile fluid from 
the operator's body, or by the influence ot his mind 
over the mind of the subject. They are agreed on this 
point, that natural laws could explain the phenomenon, 
if these laws were well understood. 

With this sort of a thing, as belonging to the 
domain of science and outside her domain, the Church 
has nothing whatever to do. This is a theory upon 
which it behooves men of science to work ; they alone 
are competent in the premises. But without at all 
encroaching on their domain, the Church claims the 
right to pronounce upon the morality of such prac- 
tices and to condemn the evils that flow therefrom. 
So great are these evils and dangers, when unscru- 
pulous and ignorant persons take to experimenting, 
that able and reliable physicians and statesmen have 
advocated the prohibition by law of all such indis- 
criminate practices. Crimes have been committed on 
hypnotized persons and crimes have been committed 
by them. It is a dangerous power exercised by men 
of evil mind and a sure means to their evil ends. It 
is likewise detrimental to physical and moral health. 
Finally, he who subjects himself to such influence 
commits an immoral act by giving up his will, his 
free agency, into the hands of another. He does this 
willingly, for no one can be hypnotized against his 



OCCULTISM. 



123 



will ; he does it without reason or just motive. This 
is an evil, and to it must be added the responsibility of 
any evil he may be made to commit whilst under this 
influence. Therefore is the Church wise in condemning 
the indiscriminate practice of hypnotism or mesmerism ; 
and therefore will her children be wise if they leave 
it alone. It is not superstition, but it is a sin against 
man's individual liberty over which he is constituted 
sole guardian, according to the use and abuse of which 
he will one day be judged. 



CHAPTER XXXV. 
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 

A RECENTLY discovered sin against the First 
Commandment is the worship of Mrs. Eddy, and it 
is commonly called Christian Science. This 
sacrilegious humbug was conceived in the brain of 
an old woman up in New Hampshire and, like the 
little demon of error that it is, it leaped forth, after a 
long period of travail, full-fledged and panoplied, and 
on its lips were these words: "What fools these 
mortals be!" Dame Eddy gets good returns from 
the sacrilegio-comic tour of her progeny around the 
country. Intellectual Boston is at her feet, and Boston 
pays well for its amusements. 

It is remarkable for an utter lack of anything 
like Christianity or science. It is as Christian as 
Buddhism and as scientific as the notions of our early 
forefathers concerning the automobile. It is a parody 
on both and like the usual run of parodies, it is a 
success. 



124 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



The average man should not attempt to delve 
down into the mysterious depths of mind and matter 
which form the basis of this system. In the first 
place, it is an impossible task for an ordinary 
intelligence; then, again, it were labor lost, for even 
if one did get down far enough one could get nothing 
satisfactory out of it. The force of Eddyism lies in 
its being mysterious, incomprehensible and contra- 
dictory. These qualities would kill an ordinary system, 
but this is no ordinary system. The only way to beat 
the Christian Scientist is to invite him to focus all the 
energy of his mind on a vulgar lamp-post and engrave 
thereon the name of the revered Eddy — this to show 
the power of mind. Then to prove the non-existence 
of matter, ask him to consent to your endeavoring 
to make a material impression on his head with an 
immaterial hammer. 

Of course this is not what he meant; but what 
he did mean will become by no means clearer after 
the wearisome, interminable lengths to which he will 
go to elucidate. The fact is that he does not know 
it himself, and no one can give what he does not 
possess. True philosophy tells us to define terms and 
never to employ expressions of more than one meaning 
without saying in what sense we use them. Contempt 
of this rule is the salvation of Christian Science, and 
that is where v/e lose. 

Yet there is something in this fad after all. Total 
insanity is never met with outside state institutions, 
and these people are at large. The ravings of a 
delirious patient are often a monstrous mass of wild 
absurdities ; but, if you question the patient when 
convalescent, you will sometimes be surprised to find 
they were all founded on facts which had become 
exaggerated and distorted. There is no such thing 
as pure unadulterated error. All of which is meant 
to convey the idea that at the bottom of all fraud 
and falsehood there is some truth, and the malice of 



CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 



error is always proportionate with the amount of truth 
it has perverted. 

The first truth that has been exaggerated beyond 
recognition is this, that a large proportion of human 
diseases are pure fiction of morbid imaginations, 
induced by the power of the mind. That such is the 
case, all medical men admit. Thus, the mind may 
often be used as a therapeutic agent, and clever 
physicians never fail to employ this kind of Christian 
Science. Mrs. Eddy is therefore no more the 
discoverer of the "malade imaginaire" than Moliere. 
When you distort this truth and write books 
proclaiming the fact that all ills are of this sort, then 
you have Eddyism up to date. Mrs. Eddy gathers 
her skirts in her hand and leaps over the abyss 
between "some ills" and "all ills" with the agility of 
a gazelle. Yes, the mind has a wonderful power 
for healing, but it will make just as much impression 
on a broken leg as on a block of granite. So much 
for the scientific part of the theory. 

The method of healing of Jesus Christ and that 
of the foundress of Christian Science are not one and 
the same method, although called by the name of 
faith they appear at first sight to the unwary to be 
identical. There is a preliminary act of the intelligence 
in both ; there is the exercise of the will power ; and 
a mention of God in Eddyism makes it look like a 
divine assistance. To the superficial there is no 
difference between a miracle performed at Lourdes 
by God at the intercession of the Blessed Virgin and 
a "cure" effected by the Widow of New Hampshire 
hills. 

Yet there is a wide difference, as wide as the 
abyss between error and truth. In faith healing, God 
interposes and alone does the healing. It is a miracle, 
a suspension of the ordinary laws of nature. Faith 
is not a cause, but an essential condition. In Christian 
Science, it is the mind of the patient or of Mrs. 



126 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Eddy that does the work. It is God only in the sense 
that God is one with the patient. Mind is the only 
thing that exists, and the human mind is one with 
the Mind which is God. Then again this cure instead 
of being in opposition to the normal state of things 
like a miracle, itself establishes a normal state, for 
disease is abnormal and in contradiction with the 
natural state of man. Mental healing, according to 
this system sets the machine going regularly ; miracles 
put it out of order for the moment. Christian Science 
therefore, repudiates the healing method of Jesus by 
faith and sets up one of its own, thereby forfeiting all 
title to be called Christian. 

Being, therefore, neither Christian nor scientific, 
this new cult is nothing but pure nonsense, like all 
superstitions ; the product of a diseased mind swayed 
by the demon of pride, and should be treated principally 
as a mental disorder. The chief, and only, merit of the 
system consists in illustrating the truth, as old as the 
world, that when men wander from the House where 
they are fed with a celestial nourishment, they will 
be glad to eat any food offered them that has a 
semblance of food, even though it be but husks and 
refuse. Man is a religious animal; take away the 
true God, and he will adore anything or everything, 
even to a cucumber. However limited otherwise, 
there is no limit to his religious folly. 



CHAPTER XXXVI. 



SWEARING. 

''Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord, thy 
God in vain." 

A name is a sign, and respect for God Himself, 
as prescribed by the First Commandment through 
faith, hope, charity, prayer and reHgion, naturally 
implies respect for the name that stands for and 
signifies God. Your name may, of itself, be nothing 
more than mere sound; but used in relation to what 
it represents, it is as sacred, and means as much to 
you, as your very person, for whatever is addressed 
to your name, whether of praise or blame, is intended 
to reach, and does effectively reach, yourself, to your 
honor or dishonor. You exact therefore of men, as 
a right, the same respect for 3^our name as for your 
person; and that is what God does in the Second 
Commandment. 

The name of God represents all that He is. He 
who profanes that name profanes a sacred thing, and 
is guilty of what is, in reality, a sacrilege. To use 
it with respect and piety is an act of religion which 
honors God. Men use and abuse this holy name, and 
first of all, by swearing, that is, by taking oaths. 

In the early history of mankind, we are told, 
swearing was unknown. Men were honest, could 
trust each other and take each other's word. But 
when duplicity, fraud and deception rose out of the 
currupt heart of man, when sincerity disappeared, 
then confidence disappeared also, no man's word was 
any longer good. Then it was that, in order to put 
an end to their dif¥erences, they called upon God by 



128 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



name to witness the truth of what they affirmed. They 
substituted God's unquestioned veracity for their own 
questioned veracity, and incidentally paid homage to 
His truth; God went security for man. Necessity 
therefore made man swear; oaths became a substitute 
for honesty. 

A reverent use of the name of God, for a lawful 
purpose, cannot be wrong ; on the contrary, it is good, 
being a public recognition of the greatest of God's 
attributes — truth. But like all good things it is liable 
to be abused. A too frequent use of the oath will 
easily lead to irreverence, and thence to perjury. It is 
against this danger, rather than against the fact itself 
of swearing, that Christ warns us in a text that seems 
at first blush to condemn the oath as evil. The common 
sense of mankind has alwa3^s given this interpretation 
to the words of Christ. 

An oath, therefore, is a calling upon God to 
witness the truth of what we say, and it means that 
we put our veracity on a par with His and make Him 
shoulder the responsibility of truthfulness. 

To take an oath we must swear by God. To 
swear by all the saints in the calendar would not make 
an oath. Properly speaking, it is not even sufficient 
to simply say: *T swear," we must use the name of 
God. In this matter, we first consider the words. Do 
they signify a swearing, by God, either in their natural 
sense or in their general acceptation? Or is there an 
intention of giving them this signification? In 
conscience and before God, it is only when there is 
such an intention that there is a formal oath and one 
is held to the conditions and responsibilities thereof. 

Bear in mind that we are here dealing for the 
moment solely with lawful swearing. There are such 
things as imprecation, blasphemy, and general 
profanity, of which there will be question later, and 
which have this in common with the oath, that they 
call on the name of God ; the difference is the same 



SWEARING. 



129 



that exists between bad and good, right and wrong. 
These must therefore be clearly distinguished from 
religious and legal swearing. 

There is also a difference between a religious 
and a legal oath. The religious oath is content with 
searching the conscience in order to verify the sincerity 
or insincerity of the svs^earer. If one really intends to 
swear by God to a certain statement, and employs 
certain words to express his intention, he is considered 
religiously to have taken an oath. If he pronounces 
a formula that expresses an oath, without the intention 
of swearing, then he has sworn to nothing. He has 
certainly committed a sin, but there is no oath. Again, 
if a man does not believe in God, he cannot swear by 
Him; and in countries where God is repudiated, all 
attempts at administering oaths are vain and empty. 
You cannot call, to attest the truth of your words, 
a being that does not exist, and for him who does not 
believe in God, He does not exist. 

The purely legal oath considers the fact and 
supposes the intention. If you swear without 
deliberation, then, with you lies the burden of proving 
it ; since the law will allow it only on evidence and 
will hold you bound until such evidence is shown. 
When a person is engaged in a serious affair, he is 
charitably supposed to know what he is talking about ; 
if it happens that he does not, then so much the worse 
for him. In the case of people who protest beforehand 
that they are infidels or agnostics, or who being 
sworn on the New Testament, disclaim all belief in 
Christ, there is nothing to be done, except it be to 
allow them to attest by the blood of a rooster or by 
the Great Horn Spoon. Then, whatever way they 
swear, there is no harm done. 



CHAPTER XXXVII. 



OATHS. 

The first quality of an oath is that it be true. It 
is evident that every statement we make, whether 
simple or sworn^ must be true. If we affirm what 
we know to be false we lie, if we swear to what we 
know to be false, we perjure ourselves. Perjury 
is a sacrilegious falsehood, and the first sin against 
the Second Commandment. 

If, while firmly believing it to be true, what we 
swear to happens to be false, we are not guilty of 
perjury, for the simple reason that our moral certitude 
places us in good faith, and good faith guarantees us 
against offending. The truth we proclaim under oath 
is relative not absolute, subjective rather than 
objective, that is to say, the statement we make is 
true as far as we are in a position to know. All this 
holds good before the bar of conscience, but it may 
be otherwise in the courts where something more than 
personal convictions, something more akin to scientific 
knowledge, is required. 

He who swears without sufficient certitude, 
without a prudent examination of the facts of the 
question, through ignorance that must be imputed to 
his guilt, that one takes a rash oath — a sin great or 
small according to the gravity of the circumstances. 
It is not infrequently grievous. 

Some oaths, instead of being statements, are prom- 
ises, sworn promises. That of which we call God to 
witness the truth is not something that is, but some- 
thing that will be. If one promises under oath, and has 
no intention of redeeming his pledge; or if he after- 



OATHS. 



wards revokes such an intention without serious rea- 
sons, and fails to make good his sworn promise, he sins 
grievously, for he makes a fool and a liar of Almighty 
God who acts as sponsor of a false pledge. Concerning 
temperance pledges, it maty here be said that they are 
simple promises made to God, but not being sworn to, 
are not oaths in any sense of the word. 

Then, again, to be lawful, an oath must be 
necessary or useful, demanded by the glory of God, 
our own or our neighbor's good; and it must be 
possible to fulfil the promise within the given time. 
Otherwise, we trifle with a sacred thing, we are guilty 
of taking vain and unnecessary oaths. There can be 
no doubt but that this is highly offensive to God, who 
is thus made little of in His holy name. 

This is the most frequent offense against the 
Second Commandment, the sin of profane swearing, 
the calling upon God to witness the truth of every 
second word we utter. It betrays in a man a very 
weak sense of his own honesty when he cannot let his 
words stand for themselves. It betokens a blasphemous 
disrespect for God Himself, represented by that name 
which is made a convenient tool to further every 
vulgar end. It is therefore criminal and degrading, 
and the guilt thereby incurred cannot be palliated by 
the plea of habit. A sin is none the less a sin because 
it is one of a great ma>ny. Vice is criminal. The 
victim of a vice can be considered less guilty only on 
condition of seriously combating that vice. Failing 
in this, he must bear the full burden of his guilt. 

Are we bound to keep our oaths? If valid, we 
certainly are. An oath is valid when the matter thereof 
is not forbidden or illicit. The matter is illicit when 
the statement or promise we make is contrary to right. 
He who binds himself under oath to do evil, not only 
does not sin in fulfiling his pledge, but would sin 
if he did redeem it. The sin he thus commits may be 



132 



MORAL BRIEFS, 



mortal or venial according to the gravity of the matter 
of the oath. He sinned in taking the oath ; he sins 
more grievously in keeping it. 

The binding force of an oath is also destroyed by 
fraud and deception. Fear may have a kindred effect, 
if it renders one incapable of a human act. Likewise a 
former oath may annul a subsequent oath under certain 
conditions. 

Again, no man in taking an oath intends to bind 
himself to anything physically or morally impossible, 
or forbidden by his superiors ; he expects that his 
promise will be accepted by the other party, that all 
things will remain unchanged, that the other party will 
keep faith, and that there will be no grave reason for 
him to change his mind. In the event of any of these 
conditions failing of fulfilment his intention is not to 
be held by his sworn word, and his oath is considered 
invalidated. He is to be favored in all doubts and is 
held only to the strict words of his promise. 

The least therefore we have to do with oaths, the 
better. They are things too sacred to trifle with. 
When necessity demands it, let our swearing honor 
the Almighty by the respect we show His holy name. 



CHAPTER XXXVni. 
VOWS. 

Vows are less common than oaths, and this is 
something to be thankful for, since being even more 
sacred than oaths, their abuse incidental to frequent 
usage would be more abominable. The fact that men 
so far respect the vow as to entirely leave it alone 
when they feel unequal to the task of keeping it 



vows. 



133 



inviolate, is a good sign— creditable to themselves and 
honorable to God. 

People ha-ve become accustomed to looking upon 
vows as the exclusive monopoly of the Catholic Church 
and her religious men and womxcn. Such things are 
rarely met with outside monasteries and convents, 
except in the case of secular priests. 'Tis true, one 
hears tell occasionally of a stray unfortunate who has 
broken away from a state voluntarily, deliberately, 
chosen and entered upon, and who struggles through 
life with a violated vow saddled upon him. But one 
does not associate the sacred and heroic character of 
the vow with such pitiable specimens of moral worth. 

The besom of Protestant reform thought to sweep 
all vows off the face of the earth, as immoral, unlawful, 
unnatural or, at least, useless things. The first Coryphei 
broke theirs ; and having learned from experience what 
troublesome things they are, instiled into their follow- 
ers a salutary distaste for these solemn engagements 
that one can get along so well without. From disliking 
them in themselves, they came to dislike them in others, 
and it has come to this that the Church has been 
obliged to defend against the cha-rge of immorality an 
institution that alone makes perfection possible. 
Strange, this ! More sad than strange. 

First of allj what is a vow? It is a deliberate 
promise made to God by which we bind ourselves to do 
something good that is more pleasing to Him than its 
omission would be. It differs from a promissory oath 
in this, that an oath makes God a witness of a promise 
made to a third party, while in a vow there is no third 
party, the promise being made directly to God. In a 
violated oath, we break faith with man ; in a broken 
vow, we are faithless to God. The vow is more 
intimate than the oath, and although sometimes the 
words are taken one for the other, in meaning they 
are widely different. 

Resolutions or purposes, such as we make in con- 



134 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



fession never to sin again, or in moments of fervor to 
perform works of virtue, are not vows. A promise 
made to the Blessed Virgin or the saints is not a. vow ; 
it must be made directly to God Himself. 

A promise made to God to avoid mortal sin is not 
a vow, in the strict sense of the word ; or rather such a 
promise is outside the ordinary province of the vow, 
which naturally embraces works of supererogation and 
counsel. It is unnecessary and highly imprudent to 
make such promises under vow. A promise to commit 
sin is a blasphemous outrage. If what we promise to 
do is something indifferent, vain and useless, opposed 
to evangelical counsels or generally less agreeable to 
God than the contrary, our promise is null and void as 
far as the having the character of a vow is concerned. 

Of course, in taking a« vow we must know what 
we are doing and be free to act or not to act. If then 
the object of the vow is matter on which a vow may 
validly be taken, we are bound in conscience to keep 
our solemn engagement. What we forbid ourselves to 
do may be perfectly lawful and innocent, but by that 
vow we forfeit the right we had to do it, and for us it 
has become sinful. The peculiar position in which a 
vow places a man in relation to his fellow-men concern- 
ing what is right and wrong, is the characteristic of the 
vow that makes it the object of much attention. But 
it requires something lacking in the outfit of an intelli- 
gent man to perceive therein anything that savors of 
the unnatural, the unlawful or the immoral. 

Concerning those whom a vow has constituted in 
a profession, we shall have a word to say later. Right 
here the folly, to say nothing stronger, of those who 
contract vows without thinking, must be apparent to 
all. No one should dare take upon himself or herself 
such a burden of his or her own initiative. It is an 
affair that imperiously demands the services of an 
outside, disinterested, experienced party, whose pru- 



vows. 



135 



dence will well weigh the conditions and the necessity 
of such a step. Without this, there is no end to the 
possible misery and dangers the taking of a vow may 
lead to. 

If through an act of unthinking foolishness or 
rash presumption, you find yourself weighed down 
with the incubus of a vow not made for your shoulders, 
the only way out is to make a clean breast of the matter 
to your confessor, and follow his directions. 



CHAPTER XXXIX. 
THE PROFESSIONAL VOWS. 

The professional vow is a triple one, and embraces 
the three great evangelical counsels of perfect chastity, 
poverty and obedience. The cloister is necessa-ry for 
the observance of such engagements as these, and it 
were easier for a lily to flourish on the banks of the 
Dead Sea, or amid the fiery blasts of the Sahara, than 
for these delicate flowers of spirituality to thrive in 
the midst of the temptations, seductions and passions of 
the every day world of this life. Necessity makes a 
practice of these virtues a profession. 

It is good to be chaste, good to be obedient, good 
to be voluntarily poor. What folly, then, to say that 
it is unlawful to bind oneself by promises of this kind, 
since it is lawful to be good — the only thing that is 
lawful ! It is not unlawful, if you will, to possess riches, 
to enjoy one's independence, to wed ; but there is virtue 
in foregoing these pleasures, and virtue is better than 
its defect, and it is no more unlawful to do better than 
to do good. 



136 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



If it is lawful to contract a solemn engagement 
with man, why not with God? If it is lawful for a 
short time, why not for a long time ? If it is lawful for 
two years, why not for ten, and a lifetime! The 
engagement is no more unlawful itself than that to 
which we engage ourselves. 

The zealous guardians of the rights of man protest 
that, nevertheless, vows destroy man's liberty, and 
should therefore be forbidden, and the profession 
suppressed. It is along this line that the governmental 
machine is being run in France at present. If the vow 
destroys liberty, these fanatics are doing what appears 
dangerously near being the same thing. 

There is a decided advantage in being your own 
slave-master over having another perform that service 
for you. If I do something which before God and my 
conscience I have a perfect right to do, if I do it with 
deliberate choice and affection^ it is difficult to see 
wherein my liberty suffers. Again, if I decide not to 
marry — a right that every man certainly has — and in 
this situation engage myself by vow to observe perfect 
chastity — which I must do to retain the friendship of 
God — I do not see how I forfeit my liberty by swearing 
away a right I never had. 

In all cases, the more difficult an enterprise a man 
enters upon and pursues to a final issue, the more fully 
he exercises his faculty of free will. And since the 
triple vow supposes nothing short of heroism in those 
who take it, it follows that they must use the very 
plenitude of their liberty to make the thing possible. 

The ''cui bono" is the next formidable opponent 
the vow has to contend with. What's the good of it? 
Where is the advantage in leading such an impossible 
existence when a person can save his soul without it? 
All are not damned who refuse to take vows. Is it not 
sufficient to be honest men and women ? 

That depends upon what you mean by an honest 



THE PROFESSIONAL VOWS. 



man. A great saint once said that an honest man 
would certainly not be hanged, but that it was by no 
means equally certain that he would not be damned. 
A man may do sundry wicked and crooked things and 
not forfeit his title to be called honest. The majority 
of Satan's subjects were probably honest people in their 
day. 

The quality of being: an honest man, according to 
many people, consists in having the privilege of doing 
a certain amount of wickedness without prejudice to 
his eternal salvation. The philosohy of this class of 
people is summed up in these words : " Do little and get 
much ; make a success of life from the sta<ndpoint of 
your own selfishness, and then sneak into heaven 
almost by stealth and fraud." That is one way of 
doing business with the Lord. But, there are greater 
things in heaven and on earth than are dreamt of in 
your philosophy, Horatio. 

Human natures differ as much as pebbles on the 
sea shore. One man's meat has often proven poison 
to another. In the religion of Jesus Christ there is 
something more than the Commandments given to 
Moses. Love of God has degrees of intensity and 
perfection. Such words as sacrifice, mortification, self- 
denial have a meaning as they have always had. God 
gives more to some, less to others ; He demands 
corresponding returns. These are things Horatio 
ignores. Yet they are real, real as his own empty and 
conceited wisdom. 



CHAPTER XL. 



THE PROFESSION. 

One of the advantages of the monastic life, 
created by vows, is that it is wholly in keeping with 
human nature such as God created it. Men differ 
in their spiritual complexion more widely even than 
they do in mental caliber and physical make-up. All 
are not fitted by character and general condition for 
the same ' career; we are "cut out" for our peculiar 
tasks. It is the calling of one to be a soldier, of 
another to be a statesman, because each is best fitted 
by nature for this particular walk of life. The born 
poet, if set to put together a machine, will, in the 
majority of cases, make a sorry mess of the job, and 
a bricklayer will usually prove to be an indifferent 
story-writer. 

So also one is called to be a good Christian, while 
his brother may be destined for a more perfect life. If 
there are vocations in the natural life, why should 
there not be in the supernatural, which is just as truly 
a life? If variety of aptitudes and likes determine 
difference of calling, why should this not hold good 
for the soul as well as for the body and mind ? If one 
should always follow the bent of one's legitimately 
natural inclinations, no fault can reasonably be found 
if another hearkens to the voice of his soul's aspirations 
and elect a career in harmony with his nature. 

There are two roads on which all men must travel 
to their destiny. One is called the way of Precept, 
the other the way of Counsel. In each the advantages 
and inconveniences are about equally balanced. The 
former is wide and level with many joys and pleasures 
along the way ; but there are many pitfalls and 



THE PROFESSION. 



stumbling blocks, while on one side is a high, steep 
precipice over which men fall to their eternal doom. 
Those destined by Providence to go over this road are 
spiritually shod for the travel ; if they slip and tumble, 
it is through their own neglect. 

Some there are to whom it has been shown by 
experience — very little sometimes suffices — that they 
have, for reasons known alone to God, been denied 
the shoe that does not slip ; and that if they do not 
wish to go over the brink, they must get off the 
highway and follow path removed from this danger, 
a path not less difficult but more secure for them. 
Their salvation depends on it. This inside path, while 
it insures safety for these, might lead the others astray. 
Each in his respective place will be saved; if they 
exchange places, they are lost. 

Then again, if you will look at it from another 
standpoint, there remains still on earth such a thing 
as love of God, pure love of God. And this love can 
be translated into acts and life. Love, as all well 
know, has its degrees of intensity and perfection. All 
well-born children love their parents, but they do not 
all love them in the same degree. Some are by nature 
more affectionate, some appreciate favors better, some 
receive more and know that more is expected of them. 

In like manner^ we who are all children of the 
Great Father are not all equally loving and generous. 
What therefore is more natural than that some should 
choose to give themselves up heart, soul and body 
to the exclusive service of God? What is there 
abnormal in the fact that they renounce the world 
and all its joys and legitimate pleasures, fast, pray and 
keep vigil, through pure love of God? There is only 
one thing they fear, and that is to offend God. By 
their vows they put this misfortune without the pale 
of possibility, as far as such a thing can be done by a 
creature endowed with free will. 

Of course there are those for whom all this is 
unmitigated twaddle and bosh. To mention 



I40 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



abnegation, sacrifice, etc., to such people is to speak 
in a language no more intelligible than Sanskrit. 
Naturally one of these will expect his children to 
appreciate the sacrifices he makes for their happiness, 
but with God they think it must be different. 

There was once a young man who was rich. He 
had never broken the Commandments of God. 
Wondering if he had done enough to be saved, he 
came to the Messiah and put the question to Him. 
The answer he received vv^as, that, if he were sinless, 
he had done well, but that there was a sanctity, not 
negative but positive, which if he would acquire, would 
betoken in him a charity becoming a follower of a 
Crucified God. Christ called the young: man to a life 
of perfection. "If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell what 
thou hast, give to the poor, then come, and follow 
me." It is not known whether this invitation was 
accepted by the young man ; but ever since then it has 
been the joy of men and women in the Catholic Church 
to accept it, and to give up all in order to serve the 
Maker. 

Scoffers and revilers of monasticism are a 
necessary evil. Being given the course of nature that 
sometimes runs to freaks, they must exist. Living, 
they must talk, and talking they must utter ineptitudes. 
People always do when they discourse on things they 
do not comprehend. But let this be our consolation: 
monks are immortal. They were, they are, they ever 
shall be. All else is grass. 



CHAPTER XLI. 

THE RELIGIOUS. 

Owing to the disturbance over things religious in 
France, vows and those who exemplify them in their 



THE RELIGIOUS. 



141 



lives are receiving of late a large share of public 
attention. On this topic, it seems, every one is 
qualified to speak; all sorts of opinions have been 
ventilated in the religious, the non-religious, and the 
irreligious press, for the benefit of those who are 
interested in this pitiful spasm of Gallic madness 
against the Almighty and His Church. The measure 
of unparalleled tyranny and injustice, in which 
antipathy to religious orders has found expression, 
is being favorably and unfavorably commented upon. 
But since monks, friars and nuns seldom find favor 
with the non Catholic world, the general verdict is 
that the religious, like the anarchist, must go ; society 
is afraid of both and is safe from neither. 

To Catholics who understand human nature and 
have read history, this condition of things is not 
surprising ; it is, we might venture to say, the normal 
state of mind in relation to things so intensely Catholic 
as religious vows. Antagonism against monasticisni 
was born the day Luther decided to take a wife ; and 
as long as that same spirit lingers on earth we shall 
expect this antagonism to thrive and prosper. Not 
only that, but we shall never expect the religious to 
get a fair hearing for their cause. The hater, open or 
covert, of the habit and cowl is whole-souled or 
nothing in his convictions. And he believes the devil 
should be fought with his own weapons. 

We do not expect all men to think as we do 
concerning the merits of the religious profession. To 
approve it without restriction would be to approve the 
Church. To find no wrong in it would be indicative 
of a dangerous Romish tendency. And we are not 
prepared to assert that any such symptoms exist to an 
alarming extent in those who expatiate on religious 
topics these latter days. There will be differences of 
opinion on this score, as on many others, and one 
fellow's opinion is as good, to himself, as another's. 

There are even objections, to many an honest 
man, serious objections, that may be brought up and 



142 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



become legitimate matter for discussion. We take it 
for granted that intelligent men do not oppose an 
institution as venerable as monasticism without reasons. 
Contention between people who respect intelligence is 
always ba«sed on what has at least a semblance of truth, 
and has for its object to detect reality and label it as 
distinct from appearance. 

We go farther, and admit that there have been 
abuses in this system of perfection, abuses that we 
were the first to detect, the first to deplore and feel 
the shame of it. But before we believed it, we 
investigated and made sure it was so. We found out 
very often that the accusations were false. Scan- 
dalmongers and dishonest critics noted the charges, 
but forgot to publish the verdict, and naturally with 
the public these charges stand. No wonder then that 
such tales breed antipathy and hatred among those 
who are not in position to control facts. 

A queer feature about this is that people do not 
give religious credit for being human. That they 
are flesh and blood, all agree ; that they should err, is 
preposterous. A hue-and-cry goes up when it becomes 
known that one of these children of Adam has paid 
the penalty of being human. One would think an 
angel had fallen from heaven. We notice in this 
attitude an unconscious recognition of the sanctity of 
the religious state; but we see behind it a Pharisaic 
spirit that exaggerates evil at the expense of justice. 

Now, if the principle that abuse destroys use is 
applied to all things, nothing will remain standing, 
and the best will go first. Corruptio optimi pessima. 
Everything human is liable to abuse ; that which is not, 
is divine. Religious and laymen, mortals all, the only 
time it is beyond our power to do wrong is when we 
are dead, buried, and twenty-four hours underground. 
If in life we make mistakes, the fault lies, not in our 
being of this or that profession, but in being human. 
Whatever, therefore, the excesses that religious can be 
proven guilty of, the institution itself must not be held 



THE RELIGIOUS. 



responsible, unless it can be shown that there exists a 
relation of cause and effect. And whoever reasons 
otherwise, abuses the intelligence of his listeners. 

We desire, in the name of honesty and fairness, 
to see less of that spirit that espies all manner of ev'l 
beneath the habit of a religious ; tha<t discovers in 
convents and monasteries plotting against the State 
in favor of the Papacy, the accumulation of untold 
wealth by oppression and extortion for the satisfaction 
of laziness and lust, iniquity of the deepest dye allied 
to general worthlessness. Common sense goes a long 
way in this world. If it were only a less rare 
commodity, and if an effective tribunal could be 
erected for the suppression of mendacity, the religious 
would appear for the first time in history in their 
true colors before the world, and light would shine in 
darkness. 



CHAPTER XLII. 

THE VOW OF POVERTY. 

One objection to the vow of poverty tliat 
has a serious face on it, and certainly looks wicked, 
is that it does not prevent the accumulation of great 
wealth, as may be seen in the cases of the Philippine 
Friars and the French orders. This is one difficulty ; 
here is another and quite different : the wealth of the 
religious is excessive, detrimental to the well-being of 
the people and a menace to the State. Taken 
separately, it is easy to dispose of these charges and 
to explain them away. But if you put them together 
in one loose, vague, general imputation of avarice, 
extortion and injustice, and hurl the same at a person 
unable to make distinctions, the shock is apt to 
disconcert him for a moment. 



144 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



The first indictment seems to hint at a 
contradiction, or at least an incompatibility, between 
the profession of poverty and the fact of possessing 
wealth. We claim that the one does not affect the 
other, that a religious may belong to a rich order and 
still keep his vow inviolate. The vow in the religious 
is individual and personal ; the riches collective. It is 
the physical person that is poor ; the moral being has 
the wealth. Men may club together, put their means 
into a common fund, renounce all personal claim 
thereto, live on a meagre revenue and employ the 
surplus for various purposes other than their needs. 
The personal poverty of such as these is real. 

This is the case of the religious. Personally they 
do not own the clothes on their backs. The necessaries 
of life are furnished them out of a common fund. 
What remains, goes through their hands for the glory 
of God and in charity to fellow-man. The employ- 
ment to which these men devote their lives^ such as 
prayer, charity, the maintenance and conducting of 
schools and hospitals, is not lucrative to any great 
extent. And since very few Orders resort to begging, 
the revenue from capital is the only means of assuring 
existence. It is therefore no more repugnant for 
religious to depend on funded wealth than it was for 
the Apostolic College to have a common purse. The 
secret reason for this condition of things is that works 
of zeal rarely yield abundant returns, and man cannot 
live on the air of heaven. 

As to the extent of such wealth and its dangers, 
it would seem that if it be neither ill gotten nor 
employed for illegitimate purposes, in justice and 
equity, there cannot be two opinions on the subject. 
Every human being has a right to the fruit of his 
industry and activity. To deny this is to advocate 
extreme socialism and anarchy and, he who puts this 
doctrine into practice, destroys the principle on which 
society rests. The law that strikes at religious 
corporations whose wealth accrues from centuries of 



THE VOW OF POVERTY. 



toil and labor, may to-morrow consistently confiscate 
the goods and finances of every other corporation in 
the realm. If you force the religious out of land and 
home, why not force Morgan, Rockefeller & Co., out 
of theirs ! The justice in one case is as good as in the 
other. 

It is difficult to see how the people suffer from 
accumulated wealth, the revenues from which are 
almost entirely devoted to the relief of misery and the 
instruction of the ignorant. The people are the sole 
beneficiaries. There is here none of the arrogance 
and selfishness that usually characterize the possession 
of wealth to the embitterment of misery and 
misfortune. The religious, by their vow and their 
means, can share the condition of the poor and relieve 
it. If there is any institution better calculated to 
promote the well-being of the common people, it 
should be put to work. When the moneyed combi- 
nations whose rights are respected, show themselves 
as little prejudicial to the welfare of the classes, the 
religious will be prepared to go out of existence. 

Ever3^one is inclined to accept as true the 
statement, on record as official, that the wealth of the 
Religious Orders in France is at the bottom of the 
trouble. We are not therefore a little astonished to 
learn from other sources that it is rather their poverty, 
which is burdensome to the people. The religious 
are not too rich, but too poor. They cannot support 
themselves, and live on the enforced charity of the 
laborer. French parents, not being equal to the task 
of maintaining monasteries and supporting large 
families, limited the number of their children. The 
population fell off in consequence. The government 
came to the relief of the people and cast out the 
religious. 

And here we have the beautiful consistency of 
those who believe that any old reason is better than 
none at all. The religious are too poor, their poverty 
is a burden on the people; the religious are too rich, 



146 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



their riches are prejudicial to the welfare of the people. 
One reason is good ; two are better. If they contradict, 
it is only a trifling matter. As for us, we don't know 
quite where we stand. We can hear well enough, 
amid the din of denunciation^ the conclusion that the 
religious must go; but we cannot, for the life of us, 
catch the why and wherefore. Is it because they are 
too poor? or because they are too rich? or because 
they are both? We might be justified in thinking: 
because they are neither, but because they are what 
they are— religious, devoted to the Church and 
champions of Her cause. This reason is at least as 
good as the two that contradict and destroy each other. 
In this sense, is monastic poverty a bad and evil thing ! 



CHAPTER XLIII. 
THE VOW OF OBEDIENCE. 

What kind of obedience is that which makes 
religious "unwilling to acknowledge any superior but 
the Pope?" We have been confidently informed this 
is the ground given in several instances for their 
removal. And we confess that, if the words 
"acknowledge" and "superior" are used in certain of 
the meanings they undoubtedly have, there is good 
and sufficient ground for such removal. At the same 
time we submit that the foregoing phrase is open to 
different interpretations of meaning, several of which 
would make out this measure of repression to be one 
of rank injustice. 

The studied misrule and abuse of language 
serves a detestable purpose that is only too evident. 
A charge like the above is true and false, that is to 



THE VOW OF OBEDIENCE. 



147 



say, it is neither true nor false ; it says nothing, unless 
explained, or unless you make it say what you wish. 
It is a sure, safe, but cowardly way of destroying an 
enemy without being obliged to admit the guilt to 
oneself. 

Now the religious, and Catholic laity as well, 
never think of acknowledging, in the full acceptation 
of the word, any other spiritual superior than the 
Pope, and there can be nothing in this deserving 
repression. Again, no Catholic may consistently 
with Catholic principles, refuse to accept as legitimate 
the legally constituted authority of the country in 
which he resides. As to a man's views on the different 
forms of government, that is nobody's business but 
his own. But whether he approves or disapproves in 
theory, his life and conduct must conform with the 
laws justly enacted under the form of Government 
that happens to be accepted. To depart from this 
rule is to go counter to Catholic teaching, and no 
religious order does so without incurring strict 
censure. 

The vow of obedience in a religious respects 
Caesar as well as God. It cannot validly bind 
one to violate the laws of State any more than to vio- 
late the law of God. This vow does not even concern 
itself with civil and political matters ; by it the 
religious alone is affected, the citizen looks out for 
himself. But the citizen is already bound by his 
conscience and the laws of the Church to respect and 
obey lawful authority. 

A good religious is a good citizen, and he cannot 
be the former, if he is not the latter. As a mere 
Catholic, he is more liable to be always found on the 
side of good citizenship, because in his religion he is 
taught, first of all, to respect authority on which all his 
religious convictions are based. There is a natural 
tendency in a Protestant, who will have nothing to do 
with authority in spiritual matters, to bring this state 
of mind over with him into temporary affairs ; being 



148 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



self-willed in greater things, he is fore-inclined to be 
self-willed in lesser. The Catholic and, for a greater 
reason, the religious knows less of this temptation; 
and the better Catholic and religious he is, the farther 
removed he is from possible revolt against, or even 
disrespect of, authority. 

Against but one Order of all those repressed can 
the charge of insubordination be brought with any 
show of truth. The Assumptionists made the mistake 
of thinking that they could with impunity criticise the 
doings of the Government, just as it is done in Paris 
every day by the boulevard press. It is generally con- 
ceded that, considering the well-known attitude of the 
Government towards the order, this was a highly 
imprudent course for a religious paper to pursue. But 
their right to do so is founded on the privilege of free 
speech. It takes very little to find abuse of free speech 
in the utterances of the clergy or religious in France. 
They are safe only when they are silent. If there 
were less docility and more defiance in their attitude, 
if the French CathoHcs relied less on God and more on 
man for redress, they would receive more justice than 
they have been receiving. 

The punishment meted out to the religious for their 
insubordination has had, we are told, a doleful effect 
on the temporal power of the Pope, an interesting 
patch of which has been broken up by the new French 
law. It is a mystery to us how this law can affect the 
temporal power of the Pope any more than the politi- 
cal status of Timbuctoo. It is passably difficult to 
make an impression on what has ceased to exist these 
thirty years. We thought the temporal power was 
dead. This bit of news has been dinned into our ears 
until we have come to believe. No conference, synod 
or council is considered by our dissenting friends 
without a good strong sermon on this topic. Strange 
that it should resurrect just in time to lose "an inter- 
esting patch" of itself! This is cruelty. Why not 
irespect the grave ? We recommend the perusal of the 



149 



THE VOW OF OBEDIENCE. 



obituary o£ the temporal power written in Italian 
politics since the year 1870. We believe the tomb is 
carefully guarded. 



CHAPTER XLIV. 
THE VOW OF CHASTITY. 

Religious are sometimes called celibates. Now, 
a celibate, one of the bachelor persuasion, is a person 
who considers himself or herself good enough 
company in this Hfe, and chooses single blessedness 
in preference to the not unmixed joys of wedlock. 
This alone is sufficient to make one a celibate, and 
nothing more is required. Religious do not wed ; but, 
specifically, that is all there is in common between 
them. All celibates are not chaste; celibacy is not 
necessarily chastity, by a large majority. Unless 
something other than selfishness suggests this choice 
of life, the word is apt to be a misnomer for profligacy. 
And one who takes the vow of celibacy does not break 
it by sinning against the Sixth Commandment ; he is 
true to it until he weds. The religious vow is 
something more than this. 

Again, chastity, by itself, does not properly 
designate the state of religious men and women. 
Chastity is moral purity, but purity is a relative term, 
and admits of many degrees. It is perfect or imper- 
fect. There is a conjugal chastity ; while in single 
life, it may concern itself with the body, with or 
without reference to the mind and heart. Chastity 
reaches its highest form when it excludes everything 
carnal, what is lawful as well as what is unlawful, 
thoughts and desires as well as deeds. 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



This is the chastity that is proper to rehgious, and 
it is more correctly called virginity. This is the 
natural state of spirits who have no bodies ; cultivated 
in the frail flesh of children of Adam, it is the most 
delicate flower imaginable. Considering the incessant 
struggle it supposes in those who take such a vow 
against the spirit wdthin us that is so strong, the taking 
and keeping of it indicate a degree of fortitude little 
short of heroism. Only the few, and that few relying 
wholly on the grace of God, can aspire to this state. 

From a spiritual point of view, there can be no 
question as to the superiority of this state of life over 
all others. The teaching of St. Paul to the Corinthians 
is too plain to need any comment, not to mention the 
example of Christ, His Blessed Mother, His disciples 
and all those who in the course of time have loved God 
best and served Him most generously. 

Prescinding from all spiritual considerations and 
looking at things through purely human eyes, vows 
of this sort must appear prejudicial to the propagation 
of the species. In fact, they go against the law of 
nature which says : increase and multiply, so we are 
told. 

If that law is natural as well as positive, it is 
certain that it applies to man collectively, and not 
individually. It is manifested only in the instinct 
that makes this duty a pleasure. Where the inclina- 
tion is lacking, the obligation is not obvious. That 
which is repugnant is not natural, in any true sense of 
the word ; whether this repugnance be of the intellec- 
tual or spiritual order, it matters not, for our nature is 
spiritual as truly as it is animal. The law of nature 
forces no man into a state that is not in harmony with 
his sympathies and affections. 

Nevertheless, it must be admitted that to a certain 
extent the race suffers numerically from an institution 
that fosters abstention from marriage. To what 
extent, is an entirely different question. Not all lay- 
men marry. It is safe to say that the vast majority of 



THE VOW OF CHASTITY. 



religious men, vow or no vow, would never wed; so 
that the vow is not really to blame for their state, and 
the consequences thereof. As for women, statistics 
show it to be impossible for all to marry since their 
number exceeds that of men. 

Now, marriage with the fair sex, is very often a 
matter of competition. Talent, beauty, character, 
disposition and accomplishments play a very active 
role in the acquisition of a husband. Considering that 
the chances of those who seek refuge under the veil 
are not of the poorest, since they are the fairest and 
best endowed of our daughters, it would seem to 
follow that their act is a charity extended to their less 
fortunate sisters who are thereby aided to success, 
instead of being doomed to failure by the insufficiency 
of their own qualifications. 

Be this as it may, what we most strenuously 
object to, is that vows be held responsible for the sins 
of others. In some countries and sections of countries, 
the population is almost stationary in marked contrast 
to that of others. Looking for the cause for this 
unnatural phenomenon, there are who see it in the 
spread of monasticism, with its vow of chastity. They 
fail to remark that not numerous, but large families 
are the best sign of vigor in a nation. Impurity, not 
chastity, is the enemy of the race. Instead of warring 
against those whose lives are pure, why not destroy 
that monster that is gnawing at the very vitals of the 
race, sapping its strength at the very font of life, that 
modern Moloch, to whom fashionable society offers 
sacrifice more abominable than the hecatombs of 
Carthage. This iniquity, rampant wherever the sense 
of God is absent, and none other, is the cause which 
some people do not see because they have good reasons 
for not wanting to see. It is very convenient to have 
someone handy to accuse of one's own faults. It is 
too bad that the now almost extinct race of Puritans 
did not have a few monks around to blame for the 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



phenomenon of their failure to keep abreast of the 
race. 

If celibacy, therefore, means untrammeled vice, 
and marriage degenerates into New Englandism, the 
world will get along better with less of both. Vows, 
if they have no other merit, respect at least the law 
of God, and this world is run according to that law. 



CHAPTER XLV. 
BLASPHEMY. 

To blaspheme is to speak ill of God ; blasphemy is 
an utterance derogatory to the respect and honor due 
to God. Primarily, it is a sin of the tongue ; but, like 
all other sins, it draws its malice from the heart. 
Thus, a thought may be blasphemous, even though the 
blasphemy remain unexpressed; and a gesture, often- 
times more expressive than a word, may contain all 
the malice of blasphemy. This impiety therefore may 
be committed in thought, in word and in deed. 

Blasphemy addresses itself directly to God, to 
His attributes and perfections which are denied, or 
ridiculed ; to Jesus Christ and the Blessed Sacrament ; 
indirectly, through His Mother and His saints, 
through Holy Scripture and religion, through the 
Church and her ministers in their quality of ministers, 
— all of which, being intimately and inseparably 
connected with the idea of God, cannot be vilified 
without the honor of God being affected; and, 
consequently, all contempt and irreverence addressed 
to them, takes on the nature of blasphemy. An 
indirect sin of blasphemy is less enormous than a direct 
offense, but the difference is in degree, not in kind. 

All error that affects God directly, or indirectly 
through sacred things, is blasphemy whether the error 



BLASPHEMY. 



consist in a denial of what is true, or an attribution 
of what is false. Contempt, ridicule, scoffing and 
sneering, where are concerned the Holy and things 
holy, are blasphemous. He also blasphemes who 
attributes to a creature what belongs to God alone, 
or can be said only of holy things, who drags down 
the sacred to the level of the profane. 

Revilings against God are happily rare ; when met 
with, they are invariably the mouthings of self-styled 
atheists or infidels whose sanity is not always a patent 
fact. Heretics are usually blasphemous when they 
treat of anything outside Jesus Christ and the Bible; 
and not even Christ and Scripture escape, for often 
their ideas and utterances concerning both are as 
injurious to God as they are false and erroneous. 
Finally, despair and anger not infrequently find 
satisfaction in abusing God and all that pertains to 
Him. 

Nothing more abominable can be conceived than 
this evil, since it attacks, and is in opposition to, God 
Himself. And nothing shows up its malice so much 
as the fact that blasphemy is the natural product and 
offspring of hate ; it goes to the limit of human power 
in revolt against the Maker. It is, however, a 
consolation to know that, in the majority of cases, 
blasphemy is found where faith is wanting or 
responsibility absent, for it may charitably be taken 
for granted that if the blasphemer really knew what 
he was saying, he would rather cut out his tongue 
than repeat it. So true is it that the salvation of many 
depends almost as much on their own ignorance as on 
the grace of God. 

There is a species of blasphemy, not without its 
degree of malice, found sometimes in people who are 
otherwise God-fearing and religious. When He visits 
them with affliction and adversity, their self-conscious 
righteousness goes out and seeks comparison with 
prosperous ungodliness, and forthwitfi comments on 
strange fact of the deserving suffering while the 



154 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



undeserving are spared. They remark to themselves 
that the wicked always succeed, and entertain a strong 
suspicion that if they were as bad as others certain 
things would not happen. 

All this smacks dangerously of revolt against 
the Providence of God. Job's problem is one that can 
be solved only by faith .and a strong spiritual sense. 
He who has it not is liable to get on the wrong 
side in the discussion; and it is difficult to go very 
far on that side without finding Providence at fault 
and thus becoming guilty of blasphemy. For, to 
mention partiality in the same breath with God's 
care of the universe, is to deny Him. 

The daily papers, a few years ago, gave public 
notoriety to two instances of blasphemy, and their 
very remarkable punishment, for it is impossible not 
to see the hand of God in what followed so close upon 
the offending. A desperate gambler called upon the 
Almighty to strike him dumb, if in the next deal a 
certain card turned up. It did turn up, and at the last 
accounts the man had not yet spoken. Another cast 
from his door a vendor of images and crucifixes 
with a curse and the remark that he would rather have 
the devil in his house than a crucifix. The very next 
day, he became the father of what came as near being 
the devil as anything the doctors of that vicinity ever 
saw. These are not Sunday-school stories invented 
to frighten children; the facts occurred, and were 
heralded broadcast throughout the land. 

Despair urged the first unfortunate to defy the 
Almighty. In the other 'twas hatred for the Church 
that honors the image of Christ crucified as one 
honors the portrait of a mother. The blasphemy in 
the second case reached God as effectively as in the 
first, and the outrage contained in both is of an order 
that human language is incapable of qualifying. 



CHAPTER XLVI. 



CURSING. 

To bless one is not merely to wish that one well, 
but also to invoke good fortune upon his head, to 
recommend him to the Giver of all goods. So, too, 
cursing, damning, imprecation, malediction — synony- 
mous terms — is stronger than evil wishing and 
desiring. He who acts thus invokes a spirit of evil, 
asks God to visit His wrath upon the object cursed, 
to inflict death, damnation, or other ills. There is 
consequently in such language at least an implicit 
calling upon God, for the evil invoked is invoked of 
God, either directly or indirectly. And that is why 
the Second Commandment concerns itself with cursing. 

Thus it will be seen that this abuse of language 
offends against religion and charity as well. To the 
malice of calling down evil upon a brother's head is 
added the impiety of calling upon God to do it, to 
curse when He should be prayed to bless. 

Of course all depends on what is the object of 
our imprecations. One species of this vice contains 
blasphemy pure and simple, that is, a curse which 
attains something that refers to God in an especial 
manner, and as such is cursed. The idea of God 
cannot be separated from that of the soul, of faith, 
of the Church, etc. Malediction addressed to them 
reaches God, and contains all the malice of blasphemy. 

When the malediction falls on creatures, without 
any reference to their relationship to God, we have 
cursing in its proper form with a special malice of its 
own. Directly, charity alone is violated, but charity 
has obligations which are binding under pain of mortal 
sin. No man can sin against himself or against his 
neighbor without offending God. 



iS6 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



A curse may be, and frequently is, emphasized 
with a vow or an oath. One may solemnly promise 
God in certain contingencies that he will damn another 
to hell; or he may call upon God to witness his 
execrations. The malice of two specific sins is here 
accumulated, the offense is double in this one 
abominable utterance ; nothing can be conceived more 
horrible, unless it be the indifferent frequency with 
which it is perpetrated. 

The guilt incurred by those who thus curse and 
damn, leaving aside the scandal which is thereby 
nearly always given, is naturally measured by the 
degree of advertence possessed by such persons. 
Supposing full deliberation, to curse a fellow-man or 
self, if the evil invoked be of a serious nature, is a 
mortal sin. 

Passion or habit may excuse, if the movement is 
what is called ''a first movement," that is, a mechanical 
utterance without reflection or volition; also, if the 
habit has been retracted and is in process of reform. 
If neither damnation nor death nor infamy nor any 
major evil is invoked, the sin may be less grievous, 
but sin it always is. If the object anathematized is 
an animal, a thing, a vice, etc., there may be a slight 
sin or no sin at all. Some things deserved to be 
cursed. In damning others, there may be disorder 
enough to constitute a venial sin, without any greater 
malice. 

Considering the case of a man who, far removed 
from human hearing, should discover too late, his 
forgetfulness to leave the way clear between a block 
and a fast-descending and ponderous ax, and, in a fit 
of acute discomfort and uncontrollable feeling 
consequential to such forgetfulness, should consign 
block, ax, and various objects in the immediate 
vicinity to the nethermost depths of Stygian darkness : 
in such a case, we do not think there would be sin. 

On the other hand, they in whose favor such 
attenuating circumstances do not militate, do the office 



CURSING. 



of the demons. These latter can do nothing but curse 
and heap maledictions upon all who do not share their 
lot. To damn is the office of the damned. It is 
therefore fitting that those who cease not to damn 
while on earth be condemned to damn eternally and 
be damned in the next Hfe. And if it is true that 
"the mouth speaks out of the abundance of the heart/' 
to what but to hell can be compared the inner soul 
of him whose delight consists in vomiting forth curses 
and imprecations upon his fellow-men? 



CHAPTER XLVII. 
PROFANITY. 

Profanity is not a specific sin. Under this 
general head come all blasphemy, false, rash, unjust 
and unnecessary oaths, rash and violated vows, and 
cursing: — called profanity, because in each case the 
name of God is profaned, that is to say, is made less 
holy, by its application to unworthy objects and in 
unbecoming circumstances ; profanity, because it has 
to do with the Holy Name, and not profanation, which 
looks to sacred things. Although language lends itself 
to many devices and is well nigh inexhaustible in its 
resources, this category of sins of profanity embraces 
about all modes of offending against the Holy Name, 
and consequently against the Second Commandment. 

We have already examined the different species 
of profanity. But it is not always easy to classify 
certain utterances and expressions that savour of 
profanity, to determine the specific nature of their 
malice, especially the guilt incurred by the speaker. 
First of all, the terms used are often distorted from 
their original signification, or require that words left 



158 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



understood be supplied; as they stand, they are often 
as meaningless to the speaker as to the general 
uninitiated public. To get at the formal malice of 
such utterances is still more difficult, for it becomes 
necessary to interpret the intentions of the speaker. 
Thus, in one case, words that contain no evident 
insult to God may be used with all the vehemence of 
profanity, to which guilt is certainly attached ; in 
another, the most unholy language may be employed 
in ignorance of its meaning, with no evil intent, the 
only danger of malice being from habit, passion or 
scandal. 

This brings us to consider certain ejaculatory 
or exclamatory expressions such as : God ! good God ! 
Lord! etc., employed by persons of very different 
spiritual complexion. Evidently, these words may be 
employed in good and in evil part; whether in one or 
the other, depends on the circumstances of their using. 

They may proceed from piety and true devotion 
of the heart, out of the abundance of which the mouth 
speaks. Far from being wrong, this is positively good 
and meritorious. 

If this is done through force of habit, or is 
the result of levity, without the least interior devotion 
or affection, it is a mitigated form of profanity. To 
say the least, no honor accrues to God from such 
language and such use of His name ; and where He is 
concerned, not to honor Him is dangerously near 
dishonoring Him. If contempt of God or scandal 
result from such language, the oflfense may easily be 
mortal. 

Finally, excited feelings of passion or wrath vent 
themselves in this manner, and here it is still more 
easy to make it a grievous offending. About the only 
thing that can excuse from fault is absolute 
indeliberation. 

Again, without implying any malediction, 
prescinding altogether from the supernatural character 
of what they represent, as ejaculations only, we come 



PROFANITY. 



across the use of such words as hell, devil, damnation, 
etc. Good ethics condemn such terms in conversation ; 
hearing them used people may be scandalized, 
especially the young; if one uses them with the 
mistaken idea that they contain blasphemy, then that 
one is formally guilty of blasphemy; finally, it is 
vulgar, coarse and unmannerly to do so. But all this 
being admitted, we do not see any more moral iniquity 
in the mention of these words than of their equivalents : 
eternal fire, Satan, perdition, etc. We do not advise 
or encourage the use of such terms, but it sometimes 
jars one's sense of propriety to see people hold up 
their hands in holy horror at the sound of these words, 
as if their mention were something unspeakably 
wicked, while they themselves would look fornication, 
for instance, straight in the face without a shudder or 
a blush. 

Profanity is certainly a sin, sometimes a grievous 
sin; but in our humble opinion, the fiat of self- 
righteous Pharisaism to the contrary notwithstanding, 
it is a few hundred times oftener no sin at all, or a 
very white sin, than the awful crime some people see 
in it. If a fellow could quote classical "Mehercule," 
and Shakespearean cuss-words, he would not perhaps 
be so vulgar as to say *'hell." But not having such 
language at his command, and being filled with strong 
feelings that clamor for a good substantial expression, 
if he looks around and finds these the strongest and 
only available ones, and uses them, — it is necessity and 
human nature, we wot, more than sacrilegious 
profanity. It were better if his speech were aye, aye 
and nay, nay ; but it does not make it look any better 
to convict him of the blackest sin on the calendar 
just because he mentioned a place that really exists, 
if it is hot, and which it is well to have ever before 
our eyes against the temptations of life. 



CHAPTER XLVIII. 



THIRD COMMANDMENT 

THE LAW OF REST. 

The last of the three Commandments that refer 
directly to God, prescribes a rest from toil, and pro- 
fane works ; and in commemoration of the mystical 
repose of the Lord after the six days' creation, 
designates the Sabbath or seventh day as a day that 
shall be set apart and made sacred to God. The 
peculiarity of the commandment is that it interferes 
with the occupations of man, intrudes upon his 
individual affairs and claims a worship of works. 
The others do not go thus far, and are satisfied with 
a worship of the heart and tongue, of affections and 
language. 

Leaving aside for the moment the special desig- 
nation of a day devoted to this worship, the law of 
rest itself deserves attention. Whether the Saturday 
or Sunday be observed, whether the rest be long or 
brief, a day or an hour, depends entirely on the posi- 
tive will of God. More than this must be said of the 
command of rest; that law grows out of our relations 
with God, is founded in nature, is according to the 
natural order of things. 

This repose means abstention from bodily activity. 
The law does not go so far as to prescribe stag- 
nation and sloth, but it is satisfied with such abstention 
as is compatible with the reasonable needs of man. 
Of its nature, it constitutes an exterior, public act 
of religion. The question is : Does the nature of our 
relations with God demand this sort of worship? 
Evidently, yes. Else God, who created the whole 
man, would not receive a perfect worship. If God 



THIRD COMMANDMENT— -LAW OF REST. l6l 

made man, man belongs to Him; if from that pos- 
session flows a natural obligation to worship with 
heart and tongue, why not also of the body? God 
has a Maker's right over us, and without some 
acknowledgment on the part of the body of this right, 
there would be no evidence that such a right existed. 

There is no doubt but that the law of our being 
requires of us an interior worship. Now, if that 
spirit of homage within us is sincere, it will naturally 
seek to exteriorize itself ; if it is to be preserved, it 
must ''out." We are not here speaking of certain 
peculiarly ordered individuals, but of the bulk of 
common humanity. Experience teaches that what 
does not come out either never existed or is not 
assured of a prolonged existence. Just as the mind 
must go out of itself for the substance of its thoughts, 
so must the heart go out to get relief from the 
pressure of its feelings. God commanded this ex- 
ternal worship because it alone could preserve internal 
affections. 

Again, there are many things which the ordinary 
man ignores concerning God, which it is necessary 
for him to know, and which do not come by intuition. 
In other words, he must be taught a host of truths 
that he is incapable of finding out by himself. Edu- 
cation and instruction in religious matters are outside 
the sphere of his usual occupations. Where will he ever 
get this necessary information, if he is not taught? 
And how can he be taught, if he does not lay aside 
occupations that are incompatible with the acquisition 
of intellectual truths? He is therefore forced by 
the law of his being, and the obligation he owes 
his Maker, to rest from his every-day labors, once in 
awhile, in order to learn his full duty, if for nothing 
else. 

Pagans, who never knew the law of Moses, 
observe neither Saturday nor Sunday ; neither do they 
all give an entire day, at fixed intervals to the ex- 
terior worship of the Deity, as we do. But a case will 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



not be found where they did not on certain occasions 
rest from work in order to offer the homage of their 
fideHty to their gods, and to Hsten to instruction and 
exhortation from their holy men. These pagans 
follow the natural law written in their souls, and it 
is there they discover the obligation they are under 
to honor God by rest from labor and to make holy 
unto Him a certain space of time. 



CHAPTER XLIX. 
THE DAY OF REST. 

The third article of the Mosaic Code not only 
enunciates the law of rest, but says just how much 
time shall be given to its observance; it prescribes 
neither a week nor a few hours, but one day in seven. 
If you have a taste for such things and look well, you 
will find several reasons put forth as justifying this 
special designation of one day in seven. The number 
seven the Jews regarded as a sacred number; the 
Romans, as the symbol of perfection. Students of 
antiquity have discovered that among nearly all peoples 
this number in some way or other refers to the Deity. 
Science finds that nature prefers this number ; light 
under analysis reveals seven colors, and all colors 
refer to the seven orders of the solar spectrum; the 
human voice has seven tones that constitute the scale 
of sound ; the human body is renewed every seven 
years. Authorities on hygiene and physiology teach 
that one day in six is too much, one day in eight is 
too little, but that one day in seven is sufficient and 
necessary for the physical needs of man. 

These considerations may or may not carry 
conviction to the average mind. On the face of it, 
they confirm rather than prove. They do not reveal 



THE DAY OF REST, 



163 



the necessity of a day of rest so much as show its 
reasonableness and how it ha<rmonizes with nature 
in its periodicity, its symmetry and its exact proportion 
to the strength of man. As for real substantial 
reasons, there is but one, — a good and sufficient, — and 
that is the positive will of God. He said: keep this 
day holy ; such is His command ; no man should need 
a better reason. 

The God-given law of Moses says Saturday, 
Christians say Sunday. Protestants and Catholics 
alike say Sunday, and Sunday it is. But this is not 
a trifling change; it calls for an explanation. Why 
was it made? What is there to justify it? On what 
authority was it done? Can the will of God, unmis- 
takably manifested, be thus disregarded and put aside 
by His creatures? This is a serious question. 

One of the most interesting things in the world 
would be to hear a Protestant Christian, on Protestant 
grounds, justify his observance of the Sunday instead 
of the Sabbath, and give reasons for his conduct. 
''Search the Scriptures." Aye, search from Genesis 
to Revelations, the" Mosaic prescriptions will hold 
good in spite of all your researches. Instead of 
justification you will find condemnation. 'The Bible, 
the Bible alone" theory hardly fits in here. Are 
Papists the only ones to add to the holy writings, or 
to go counter to them? Suppose this change cannot 
be justified on Scriptural grounds, what then? And 
the fact is^ it cannot. 

It is hardly satisfactory to remark that this is a 
disciplinary injunction, and Christ abrogated the 
Jewish ceremonial. But if it is nothing more than 
this, how came it to get on the table of the Law ? Its 
embodiment in the Decalogue makes it somewhat 
different from all other ceremonial prescriptions ; as it 
stands, it is on a par with the veto to kill or to steal. 
Christ abolished the purely Jewish law, but he left the 
Decalogue intact. 

Christ rose from the dead on Sunday, 'tis true; 



164 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



but nowhere in writing can it be found that His 
resurrection on that day meant a change in the Third 
Commandment. In the nature of the event, there is 
absolutely no relation between it and the observance 
of Sunday. 

Where will our friend find a loop-hole to escape? 
Oh! as usual, for the Sunday as for the Bible, he will 
have to fall back on the old Church. What in the 
world could he do without her ? He will find there an 
authority, and he is obliged to recognize it, even if 
he does on ordinary occasions declaim against and 
condemn it. Incidentally, if his eyes are open, he will 
discover that his individually interpreted Bible has 
failed most woefully to do its work; it condemns the 
Protestant Sunday. 

This day was changed on the sole authority of 
the Holy Roman Catholic Church, as the representative 
of God on earth, to whose keeping was confided the 
interpretation of God's word, and in whose bosom is 
found that other criterion of truth, called tradition. 
Tradition it is that justifies the change she made. 
Deny this, and there is no justification possible, and you 
must go back to the Mosaic Sabbath. Admit it, and if 
you are a Protestant you will find yourself in some- 
what of a mess. 

A logical Protestant must be a very uneasy being. 
If the Church is right in this, why should she not 
be right in defining the Immaculate Conception? And 
if she errs here, what assurance is there that she 
does not err there? How can he say she is right on 
one occasion, and wrong on another? What kind of j 
nonsense is it that makes her truthful or erring 
according to one's fancy and taste? Truly, the 
reformer blundered when he did not trea^t the Sunday 
as he treated the Pope and all Church authority, for it 
is papistical to a degree. 



CHAPTER L. 



KEEPING THE LORD'S DAY HOLY. 

The Third Commandment bids us sanctify the 
Lord's day; but in what that sanctification shall 
consist, it does not say. It is certain, however, that 
it is only by worship, of one kind or another, that 
the day can be properly kept holy to the Lord ; and 
since interior worship is prescribed by the First 
Commandment, exterior and public worship must be 
what is called for. Then, there are many modes of 
worship; there is no end to the means man may 
devise of offering homage to the Creator. 

The first element of worship is abstention from 
profane labor; rest is the first condition of keeping 
the Sabbath. The word Sabbath itself means cessation 
of work. You cannot do two things at the same time, 
you cannot serve God and Mammon. Our everyday 
occupations are not, of their nature, a public homage 
of fidelity to God. If any homage is to be offered, 
as a preliminary, work must cease. This interruption 
of the ordinary business of life alone makes it possible 
to enter seriously into the more important business of 
God's service, and in this sense it is a negative worship. 

Yet, there is also something positive about it, for 
the simple fact of desisting from toil contains an 
element of direct homage. Six days are ours for 
ourselves. What accrues from our activity on those 
days is our profit. To God we sacrifice one day and 
all it might bring to us, we pay to Him a tithe of our 
time, labor and earnings. By directing aright our 
intentions, therefore, our rest assumes the higher 
dignity of explicit, emphatic religion and reverence, 
and in a fuller manner sanctifies the day that is the 
Lord's. 

We should, however, guard ourselves against the 



i66 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



mistaken notion that slotii and idleness are synonymous 
of rest. It is not all activity, but the ordinary activity 
of common life, that is forbidden. It were a 
sacrilegious mockery to make God the author of a law 
that fosters laziness and favors the sluggard. Another 
extreme that common sense condemns is that the 
physical man should suffer martyrdom while the soul 
thus communes with God, that promenades and 
recreation should be abolished, and social amenities 
ignored, that dryness, gloom, moroseness and severity 
are the proper conditions of Sabbatical observance. 

In this respect, our Puritan ancestors were the 
true children of Pharisaism, and their Blue Laws 
more properly belong in the Talmud than in the 
Constitution of an American Commonwealth. God 
loves a cheerful giver, and would you not judge from 
appearances that religion was painful to these pious 
witch-burners and everything for God most grudgingly 
done? Sighs, grimaces, groans and wails, this is the 
homage the devils in hell offer to the justice of God ; 
there is no more place for them in the religion of 
earth than in the religion of heaven. 

Correlative with the obligation of rest is that of 
purely positive worship, and here is the difficulty of 
deciding just what is the correct thing in religious 
worship. The Jews had their institutions, but Christ 
abolished them. The Pagans had their way — sacrifice ; 
Protestants have their preaching and hymn-singing. 
Catholics offer a Sacrifice, too, but an unbloody one. 
Later on, we shall hear the Church speak out on the 
subject. She exercised the right to change the day 
itself ; she claims naturally the right to say how it 
should be observed, because the day belongs to her. 
And she will impose upon her children the obligation 
to attend mass. But here the precepts of the Church 
are out of the question. 

The obligation, however, to participate in some 
act of worship is plain. The First Commandment 
charges every man to offer an exterior homage of one 



KEEPING THE LORD's DAY HOLY. 1 67 

kind or another, at some time or another. The Third 
sets aside a day for the worship of the Divinity. Thus 
the general command of the first precept is specified. 
This is the time, or there is no time. With the Third 
Commandment before him, man cannot arbitrarily 
choose for himself the time for his worship, he must 
do it on Sunday. 

Public worship being established in all Christian 
communities, every Christian who cannot improve 
upon what is offered and who is convinced that a 
certain mode of worship is the best and true, is bound 
by the law to participate therein. The obligation may 
be greater if he ignores the principles of religion 
and cannot get information and instruction outside the 
temple of religion. For Catholics, there is only one 
true mode of public worship, and that is the Sacrifice 
of the Mass. No layman is sufficient unto himself 
to provide such an act of religion. He has, therefore, 
no choice, he must assist at that sacrifice if he would 
fulfil the obligation he is under of Sunday worship. 



CHAPTER LI. 

WORSHIP OF SACRIFICE. 

We Catholics contend, and our contention is 
based on a law of nature that we glean from the 
history of man, that sacrifice is the soul of religion, 
that there never was a universally and permanently 
accepted religion — and that there cannot be any such 
religion — without an altar, a victim, a priest, and a 
sacrifice. We claim that reason and experience would 
bear us out in this contention, even without the 
example and teaching and express commands of Jesus 



i68 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Christ, who, in founding a new and the only true 
religion, Himself offered sacrifice a-nd left a sacrifice 
to be perpetually offered in His religion; and that 
sacrifice constitutes the high worship we owe to the 
Creator. 

It is our conviction thatj when man came into 
the presence of the Almighty, his first impulse was 
to speak to Him, and his first word was an act of 
adoration. But human language is a feeble medium 
of communication with the Almighty. Man talks to 
man. To talk with God, he sought out another 
language; and, as in the case of Adam's sons, he 
discovered in sacrifice a better and stronger mode of 
expressing his religious feelings. He therefore offered 
sacrifice, and sacrifice became the language of man in 
his relations with the Deity. 

In its simplest definition, sacrifice is the offering 
to God of a victim, by one authorized for that task. 
It supposes essentially the destruction of the victim ; 
and the act is an eloquent acknowledgment, in 
language that is as plain as it possibly can be made, 
that God is the supreme Lord of life and death, that 
all things that exist come from Him, and revert to 
Him as to their natural end. 

The philosophy of sacrifice is that man, in some 
manner or other, had incurred the wrath of the 
Almighty. The pagan could not tell in just what his 
offense consisted ; but there is nothing plainer than the 
fact that he considered himself under the ban of God's 
displeasure, and that sin had something to do with it ; 
and he feared the Deity accordingly. We know that 
original sin was the curse under which he labored. 

Whatever the offense was^ it was in the flesh, 
the result of weakness rather than malice. There was 
something in his nature that inclined to evil and was 
responsible for sin. The better part tried to serve, but 
the inferior man revolted. Flesh, therefore, was 
wicked and sinful ; and since all offense must be atoned 
for, the flesh should pay the penalty of evil. The 



WORSHIP OF SACRIFICE. 



169 



wrath of God could be appeased, and sacrifice was the 
thing that could do it. 

Another thing most remarkable among those who 
worshiped by sacrifice in the early times, is S)iit 
they believed firmly in the reversibility of merit, that 
is, that the innocent could atone for the wicked. 
Somehow, they acquired the notion that stainless 
victims were more agreeable to God than others. God 
sanctioned this belief among the Jews, and most 
strikingly on the hill of Calvary. 

This being the case, man being guilty and not 
having the right to inflict the supreme penalty upon 
himself, the natural thing to do was to substitute a 
vicitim for himself, to put the flesh of another in the 
place of his own and to visit upon it the punishment 
that was due to himself. And he offered to God this 
vicarious atonement. His action spoke in this wise: 
"My God, I am sinner and deserve Thy wrath. But 
look upon this victim as though it were myself. My 
sins and offenses I lay upon its shoulders, this knife 
shall be the bolt of Thy vengeance, and it shall make 
atonement in blood." This is the language of sacrifice. 
As we have said, it supposes the necessity of atonement 
and belief in the reversibility of merit. 

Now, if we find in history, as we certainly do find, 
— tha-t all peoples offered sacrifice of this kind, we do 
not think we would be far from the truth if we 
deduced therefrom a law of nature ; and if it is a law 
of nature, it is a law of God. If there is no religion 
of antiquity that did not offer sacrifice, then it would 
seem that the Almighty had traced a path aJong 
which man naturally trod and which his natural 
instinct showed him. 

We believe in the axiom of St. Augustine: 
"securus judicet orbis terrarum, a universally accepted 
judgment can be safely followed." Especially do we 
feel secure with the history of the chosen people of 
God before us and its sacrifice ordained by the law ; 
with the sanction of Christ's sacrifice in our mind, and 



170 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



the practice of the divinely inspired Church which 
makes sacrifice the soul of her worship. 

The victim we have is Jesus Christ Himself, and 
none other than He. He gave us His flesh and blood 
to consume, with the command to consume. Our 
sacrifice, therefore, consists in the offering up of this 
Victim to God and the consuming of it. Upon the 
Victim of the altar, as upon the Victim of the Cross, 
we lay our sins and offenses, and, in one case as in the 
other, the sacred blood, in God's eyes, washes our 
iniquity away. 

Of course, it requires faith to believe, but religion 
is nothing if it is not whole and entire a matter of 
faith. The less faith you have, the more you try to 
simplify matters. Waning faith began by eliminating 
authority and sacrifice and the unwritten word. Now 
the written word is going the same way. Pretty soon 
we shall hear of the Decalogue's being subjected to 
this same eliminating process. After all, when one 
gets started in that direction^ what reason is there 
that he should ever stop I 



CHAPTER LH. 

WORSHIP OF REST. 

Participation in public worship is the positive 
obligation flowing from the Third ' Commandment ; 
abstention from labor is what is negatively enjoined. 
Now, works differ as widely in their nature as differ 
in form and dimension the pebbles on the sea-shore. 
There are works of God and works of the devil, and 
works which, as regards spirituality, are totally 



WORSHIP OF REST. 



171 



indifferent, profane worlcs, as distinguished from 
sacred and sinful works. And these latter may be 
corporal or intellectual or both. Work or labor or toil, 
in itself, is a spending of energy, an exercise of 
activity ; it covers a deal of ground. And since the law 
simply says to abstain from work, it falls to us to 
determine just what works are meant, for it is certain 
that all works, that is, all that come under the general 
head of work, do not profane the Lord's day. 

The legislation of the Church, which is the 
custodian of the Sunday, on this head commends itself 
to all thoughtful men ; while, for those who recognize 
the Church as the true one, that legislation is authority. 
The Church distinguishes three kinds of profane 
works, that is, works that are neither sacred nor 
iniquitous of their nature. There is one kind which 
requires labor of the mind rather than of the body. 
These works tend directly to the culture or exercise 
of the mind, and are called liberal works, because 
under the Romans, freemen or "liberi" almost 
exclusively were engaged therein. Such are reading, 
writing, studying, music, drawing — in general, mental 
occupations in whole, or more mental than corporal. 
These works the Church does not consider the law 
includes in its prohibition, and they are consequently 
not forbidden. 

It is impossible here to enumerate all that enters 
into this class of works ; custom has something to say 
in determining what is liberal in our works; and in 
investigating, we must apply to each case the general 
principle. The labor in question may be gratuitous 
or well paid ; it may cause fatigue or afford recreation : 
all this is not to the point. The question is, outside the 
danger of omitting divine, service, scandal or circum- 
stances that might lead to the annoyances and 
distraction of others — the question is: does this work 
call for exercise of the mind more than that of the 
body? If the answer is affirmative, then the work 
is liberal, and as such it is not forbidden on Sunday, 



172 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



it is not considered a profanation of the Lord's day. 

On the other extreme are what go by the name 
of servile works, which call forth principally bodily 
effort and tend directly to the advantage of the body. 
They are known also as works of manual labor. 
Before the days of Christianity, slaves alone were 
thus employed, and from the word *'servi" or slaves 
these are called servile works. 

Here again it is the nature of the work that makes 
it servile. It may be remunerative or not, recreative 
or not, fatiguing or not ; it may be a regular occupation, 
or just taken up for the moment; it may be, outside 
cases of necessity, for the glory of God or for the 
good of the neighbor. If it is true that the body has 
more part therein than the mind, then it is a servile 
work and it is forbidden. Of course there are serious 
reasons that dispense us from our obligation to this 
law, but we are not talking about that just at present. 

The reason of the proscription is, not that such 
works are evil, but that they interfere with the intention 
we should give to the worship we owe to God, and 
that, without this cessation of labor, our bodily health 
would be impaired : these are the two motives of the 
law. But even if it happened, in an individual case, 
that these inconveniences were removed, that neither 
God's reverence nor one's own health suffered from 
such occupations as the law condemns, the obligation 
would still remain to abstain therefrom, for it is 
general and absolute, and when there is question of 
obeying a law, the subject has a right to examine 
the law, but not the motives of the law. 

We shall later see that there are other works, 
called common, which require activity of the mind and 
of the body in about an equal measure or which enter 
into the common necessities of life. These are not 
forbidden in themselves, although in certain 
contingencies they may be adjudged unlawful ; but, in 
the matter of servile works, nothing but necessity, the 
greater glory of God, or the good of the neighbor, can 



WORSHIP OF REST. I73 

allow us to consider the law non-binding. To break 
it is a sin, slight or grievous, according to the nature 
of the offense. 



CHAPTER LIII. 
SERVILE WORKS. 

But, if servile works are prohibited on the Lord's 
day, it must be remembered that "the Sabbath was 
made for man, and not man for the Sabbath," that, 
for certain good a-nd sufficient reasons, the law ceases 
to oblige ; and, in these circumstances, works of a 
purely servile nature are no longer unlawful. This 
is a truth Christ made very clear to the straight-laced 
Pharisees of the old dispensation who interpreted too 
rigorously the divine prohibition ; and certain Pharisees 
of the new dispensation, who are supposed assiduously 
to read the Bible, should jog their memories on the 
point in order to save themselves from the ridicule 
that surrounds the memory of their ancestors of Blue- 
Law fame. The Church enters into the spirit of her 
divine Founder and recognizes cases in which labor 
on Sunday may be, and is, more agreeable to God, and 
more meritorious to ourselves, than rest from labor. 

The law certainly does not intend to forbid 
a kind of works, specifically servile in themselves, 
connected with divine worship, required by the 
necessities of public religion, or needed to give to 
that worship all the solemnity and pomp which it 
deserves; provided, of course, such things could not 
well be done on another day. All God's laws are for 
His greater glory, and to assert that works necessary 
for the honoring of God are forbidden by His law is 



174 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



to be guilty of a contradiction in terms. All things 
therefore needed for the preparation a^nd becoming 
celebration of the rites of religion, even though of a 
servile nature, are lawful and do not come under the 
head of this prohibition. 

The law ceases likewise to bind when its 
observance would prevent an act of charity towards 
the neighbor in distress, necessity, or pressing need. 
If the necessity is real and true charity demands it, 
in matters not what work, not intrinsically evil, is to 
be done, on what day or for how long a time it is to 
be done ; charity overrides every law, for it is itself 
the first law of God. Thus, if the neighbor is in 
danger of suffering, or actually suffers, any injury, 
damage or ill, God requires that we give our services 
to that neighbor rather than to Himself. As a matter 
of fact, in thus serving the neighbor, we serve God 
in the best possible way. 

Finally, necessity, public as well as personal, 
dispenses from obligation to the law. In time of war, 
all things required for its carrying on are licit. It is 
lawful to fight the elements when they threaten 
destruction, to save crops in an interval of fine weather 
when delay would mean a risk; to cater to public 
conveniences which custom adjudges necessary, — and 
by custom we mean that which has at least the implicit 
sanction of authority, — such as public conveyances, 
pharmacies, hotels, etc. Certain industries run by 
steam power require that their fires should not be 
put out altogether, and the labor necessary to keep 
them going is not considered illicit. In general, all 
servile work that is necessary to insure against serious 
loss is lawful. 

As for the individual, it is easier to allow him to 
toil on Sunday, that is, a less serious reason is required, 
if he assists at divine worship, than in the contrary 
event. One can be justified in omitting both 
obligations only in the event of inability otherwise 
to provide for self and family. He whose occupation 



SERVILE WORKS. 



demands Sunday labor need not consider himself 
guilty so long as he is unable to secure a position 
with something like the same emoluments; but it is 
his duty to regret the necessity that prevents him 
from fulfiling the law, and to make eiforts to better 
his condition from a spiritual point of view, even if 
the change does not to any appreciable extent better it 
financially; a pursuit equally available should be 
preferred. Neglect in seeking out such an amelioration 
of situation would cause the necessity of it to cease 
and make the delinquent responsible for habitual 
breach of the law. 

If it is always a sin to engage without necessity 
in servile works on Sunday, it is not equally sinful 
to labor little or labor much. Common sense tells us 
that all our failings are not in the same measure 
offensive to God, fof they do not all contain the same 
amount of malice and contempt of authority. A person 
who resolves to break the law and persists in working 
all day long, is of a certainty more guilty than he 
who after attending divine service fails so far as to 
labor an hour. The question therefore is, how long 
must one work on Sunday to be guilty of a mortal 
sin. 

The answer to this question is : a notable time ; 
but that does not throw a very great abundance of 
light on the subject. But surely a fourth of the whole 
is a notable part. Now, considering that a day's work 
is, not twenty-four hours, but ten hours, very rarely 
twelve, frequently only eight, it will be seen to follow 
that two hours' work would be considered a notable 
breach of the law of rest. And this is the decision 
of competent authority. Not but that less might make 
us grievously guilty, but we may take it as certain 
that he who works during two full hours, at a labor 
considered servile, without sufficient reason, commits 
^ mortal sin. 



CHAPTER LIV. 



COMMON WORKS. 

There is a third sort of works to be considered 
in relation to Sunday observance, which, being of their 
nature neither Hberal nor servile, go by the specific 
name of common works. This class embraces works 
of two kinds, viz., those which enter into the common, 
daily, inevitable necessities of life, and those in which 
the mind and body are exerted in an equal measure. 

The former are not considered servile because 
they are necessary, not in certain circumstances, but 
at all times, for all persons, in all conditions of life. 
Activity of this kind, so universally and imperiously 
demanded, does not require dispensation from the law, 
as in the case of necessary servile works properly 
so-catlled ; but it stands outside all legislation and is 
a law unto itself. 

These works are usually domestic occupations, 
as cooking and the preparation of victuals, the keeping 
of the house in becoming tidiness, the proper care of 
children, of beasts of burden and domestic animals. 
People must eat, the body must be fed, life requires 
attention on Sunday as well as on the other six days ; 
and in no circumstances can this labor be dispensed 
with. Sometimes eatables for Sunday consumption 
may be prepared on the previous day ; if this is not 
done, whether through forgetfulness, neglect or 
indifference, it is lawful on Sunday to prepare a good 
table, even one more sumptuous than on ordinary 
days. For Sunday is a day of festival, and without 
enthusing over the fact, we must concede that the 
words feast and festival are synonymous in human 



COMMON WORKS. 



language, that the ordinary and favorite place for 
human rejoicing is the table, and in this man differs 
not from the other animals of creation. This may not 
be aesthetic, but it is true. 

In walking, riding, games, etc., the physical and 
mental forces of man are called into play in about 
equal proportion, or at least, these occupations can be 
called neither Hberal arts nor manual labor; all 
manners of persons engage therein without respect 
to condition or profession. These are also called 
common works ; a<nd to them may be added hunting 
and fishing, when custom, rightly understood, does not 
forbid them, and in this region custom most uniformly 
does so forbid. 

These occupations are looked upon as innocent 
pastime, affording relief to the body and mind, and in 
this respect should be likened to the taking of food. 
For it is certain that sanitary conditions often as 
imperiously demand recreation as nourishment. 
Especially is this the case with persons given to 
sedentary pursuits, confined during the week to shops, 
factories and stores, and whose only opportunity this 
is to shake off the dull monotony of work and to give 
the bodies and minds necessary relaxation and 
distraction. It is not physical rest that such people 
require so much as healthy movement of a pleasing 
kind, and activity that will draw their attention from 
habitual channels and thus break the strain that 
fatigues them. Under these conditions, common 
works are not only allowed, but they are to be 
encouraged. 

But it must not be lost sight of that these pursuits 
are permitted as long as they remain common works, 
that is, as long as they do not accidentally become 
servile works, or go contrary to the end for which 
they are allowed. This may occur in three different 
manners, and when it does occur, the works known as 
common are forbidden as servile works. 



178 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



1. They must not expose us to the danger of 
omitting divine service. The obligation to positively 
sanctify the day remains intact. Sin may be 
committed, slight or grievous, according as the danger 
to which we expose ourselves, by indulging in these 
pursuits, of missing public worship, is more or less 
remote, more or less probable. 

2. These works become illicit when they are 
excessive, when too much time is given to them, when 
the body receives too large a share of the exercise, 
when accompanied by overmuch application, show or 
fatigue. In these cases, the purpose of the law is 
defeated, the works are considered no longer common 
and fall under the veto that affects servile works. An 
aggravating circumstance is that of working for the 
sole purpose of gain, as in the case of professional 
baseball, etc. 

3. Lastly, there are exterior circumstances that 
make these occupations a desecration of the Lord's 
day, and as such evidently they cannot be tolerated. 
They must not be boisterous to the extent of disturbing 
the neighbor's rest and quiet, or detracting from the 
reverence due the Sabbath ; they must not entice others 
away from a respectful observance of the Lord's day 
or offer an opportunity or occasion for sin, cursing, 
blasphemy and foul langfuag^e, contention and drunken- 
ness ; they must not be a scandal for the community. 

Outside these contingencies of disorder, the 
Sabbath rest is not broken by indulgence in works 
classified as common works. Such activity, in all 
common sense and reason, is compatible with the 
reverence that God claims as His due on His day. 



CHAPTER LV. 



PARENTAL DIGNITY. 

We have done with the three commandments 
that refer directly to God. The second Table of the 
Law contains seven precepts that concern themselves 
with our relations to God, indirectly, through the 
creature ; they treat of our duties and obligations 
toward the neighbor. As God may be honored, so He 
may be dishonored, through the works of His ha-nd; 
one may offend as effectively by disregard for the 
law that binds us to God's creatures as for that which 
binds us to the Creator Himself. 

Since parents are those of God's creatures that 
stand nearest to us, the Fourth Commandment 
immediately orders us to honor them as the authors 
of our being and the representatives of divine 
authority, and it prescribes the homage we owe them 
in their capacity of parents. But that which applies 
to fathers and mothers, applies in a certain degree 
to all who have any right or authority to command ; 
consequently, this law also regulates the duties of 
superiors and inferiors in general to one another. 

The honor we owe to our parents consists in four 
things : respect for their dignity, love for their 
beneficence, obedience to their authority and assistance 
in their needs. Whoever fails in one of these 
requirements, breaks the law, offends God and sins. 
His sin may be mortal, if the quality of the offense 
and the malice of the offender be such as to constitute 
a serious breach of the law. 

'Tis the great fault of our age to underrate 
parental dignity. In the easy-going world, preference 



i8o 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



IS given to profligate celibacy over honorable wedlock ; 
marriage itself is degraded to the level of a purely 
natural contract, its bond has lost its character of 
indissolubility and its obligations are shirked to meet 
the demands of fashion and convenience. When 
parents, unworthy ones, do not appreciate their own 
dignity, how will others, their children, appreciate it? 
And parenthood will never be esteemed while its true 
nature and sanctity are ignored and contemned ; there 
is no dignity where the idea of God is excluded. 

After God had created man, He left him to work 
out his destiny in a natural way ; and immediately man 
assumed towards his offspring the rela-tion that God 
first held towards himself — he assumed the preroga- 
tives of paternity and of authority. All paternity 
belongs to God, and to Him alone ; yet man is delegated 
to that lofty, quasi-divine function. God alone can 
create ; yet so near does the parental office approach 
to the power of creation that we call it pro-creation. 

'Tis true, this privilege man holds in common 
with the rest of animated nature, but with this 
difference : that the fruit of his loins is a child of God, 
with an immortal soul, an heir to heaven where its 
destiny is to glorify the Eternal during all eternity. 
And thus, man, in his function of parent, is as far 
differentiated from the rest of animal nature as the 
act by which God created man is superior to all His 
other creative acts. 

If the tempter, when working out his plan for the 
fall of our first parents, had simply and unconditionally 
said: "Ye shall be as gods," his utterance would 
have in it more truth than he intended, for the mantle 
of parenthood that was soon to fall upon them made 
them like unto God. The children that romped around 
them, looked up to them even, almost, as they were 
accustomed to look up to the Creator. And little the 
wonder, since to their parents they owed their very 
existence. 

As depositaries of authority, there is no human 



PARENTAL DIGNITY. l8l 

station, however exalted, comparable to theirs. 
Children are not merely subjects, they belong to their 
parents. Church and State^ under God, may see to it 
that that authority is not abused ; but within the bounds 
of right, they are held to respect it ; and their acts that 
go contrary to the exercise of parental authority are, 
by the fact of such opposition, null and void. Before 
the State or Church, the family was ; its natural rights 
transcend theirs, and this bowing, as it were, of all 
constituted human authority before the dominion of 
parents is evidence enough of their dignity. 

"God could not be everywhere, therefore he made 
parents — fathers and mothers" — that is how the pagans 
used to put it. However theologically unsound this 
proposition may appear, it is a beautiful attempt a<t a 
great truth, viz., that parents towards us stand in 
God's stead. In consequence of this eminent dignity 
that is theirs, they deserve our respect. They not only 
deserve it, but God so ordains it. 



CHAPTER LVI. 

FILIAL RESPECT. 

Worthy of honor are they whom the Lord sees 
fit to honor. In the exalted station to which they 
have been called and in the express command made 
by the Lord to honor them, we see evidence of the 
dignity of parents ; and the honor we owe them for 
this dignity is the honor of respect. By respect, we 
mean the recognition of their superiority, the rever- 
ence, veneration and awe all well-born men instinc- 
tively feel for natural worth that transcends their 
own, the deference in tone, manner and deportment 
that naturally belongs to such worth. 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



It is much easier to say in what respect does 
not consist than to define the term itself. If it really 
exists in the heart — and there it must exist, to be 
at all — it will find expression in a thousand different 
ways, and will never be at a loss to express itself. 
Books will give you the laws of etiquette and will 
tell you how to be polite; but the laws that govern 
respect are graven on the heart, and he whose heart 
is in the right place never fails to read and interpret 
them correctly. Towards all, at all times and in all 
places, he will conform the details of his life with 
the suggestions of his inner consciousness — this is 
respect. 

Respect has no substitute; neither assistance nor 
obedience nor love can supply it or take its place 
It may happen that children are no longer obliged 
to help their parents ; they may be justified in not 
obeying them ; the circumstances may be such that 
they no longer have love or affection for them ; but 
respect can never be wanting without serious guilt. 
The reason is simple: because it is due in justice, 
because it is founded on natural rights that can never 
be forfeited, even when parents themselves lose the 
sense of their own dignity. 

Sinful, wicked and scandalous parents there have 
been, are, and will be. But just as they do not owe 
the excellence to any deed of their own, but to the 
free choice of the Almighty, so it depends not on 
themselves to forfeit it. God made them parents 
without respect for their personal worth. He is the 
custodian of their dignity. Good or bad, they are 
parents and remain parents. Woe unto those who 
despise the authors of their days! 

Respect overlooks an innocent joke at the ex- 
pense of a parent, when absolutely no malice is in- 
tended, when on both sides it is looked upon as a 
matter of good-natured pleasantry. It brooks humor. 
Not all familiarity breeds contempt. 

But contempt, which is directly opposed to re- 



PARENTAL DIGNITY. 



183 



spect, is a sin that is never anything but mortal. It 
refuses honor, belittles dignity and considers parents 
beneath esteem. It is contempt to laugh at, to mock, 
to gibe and insult parents ; it is contempt to call them 
vile, opprobrious names, to tell of their faults; it is 
contempt, and the height of contempt, to defy them, 
to curse them or to strike them. It is bad enough 
when this sort of thing is directed against an equal; 
but when parents are made the objects of contempt, 
it acquires a dignity that is infernal. 

The malediction of Heaven, the almighty wrath 
of God follows him or her who despises a parent. 
We are repeatedly told in Holy Writ that such 
offenders "shall die the death." Scorn of parents 
is looked upon as a crime almost on a par with hatred 
of God. Pagans frequently punished it with death. . 
Among Christians it is left to the avenging wrath 
of God who is pledged to defend the dignity of His 
delegated paternity. 

It is not a rare occurrence to see just retribution 
visited upon parents who in their day were undutiful, 
unworthy and unnatural children. The justice of 
Heaven often permits it to be done unto us as we do 
unto others. Our children will treat us as we shall 
have treated our parents ; their hands will be raised 
against us and will smite us on the cheek to avenge 
the grandsire's dishonor and tears, and to make us 
atone in shame for our sins against our parents. If 
we respect others, they will respect us ; if we respect 
our parents, our children will respect us. 



CHAPTER LVII. 



FILIAL LOVE. 

He who has a heart, and has it properly located, 
will not fail to love that which is good; he will have 
no difficulty in so doing, it will require neither com- 
mand nor persuasion to make him do so. If he proves 
refractory to this law of nature, it is because he is not 
like the rest of mortals, because he is inhuman; and 
his abnormal condition is due, not to nature's mis- 
takes, but to his own. And no consideration under 
heaven will be equal to the task of instiling affection 
into a stone or a chunk of putty. 

That is good which is desirable, or which is 
the source of what is desirable. God ailone is abso- 
lutely good, that is to say, good in Himself and the 
cause of all good. Created things are good in the 
proportion of their furnishing us with things desir- 
able, and are for that reason called relatively good. 
They confer benefits on one and not perhaps on 
another. When I say: this or that is good, I mean 
that it is useful to me, and is productive of comfort, 
happiness and other desirable things. Because we 
are naturally selfish, our appreciation of what is good 
depends on what we get out of it. 

Therefore, it is that a child's first, best and 
strongest love should be for its parents, for the 
greatest good it enjoys, the thing of all others to be 
desired, the essential condition of all else, namely its 
existence, it owes to its parents. Life is the boon we 
receive from them ; not only the giving, but the saving 
in more than one instance, the fostering and preserv- 
ing and sustaining during long years of helplessness, 



FILIAL LOVE. 



and the adorning of it with all the advantages we 
possess. Nor does this take into account the inti- 
mate cost, the sufferings and labors, the cares and 
anxieties, the trouble and worriment that are the lot 
of devoted parenthood. It is life spent and given 
for life. Flesh and blood, substance, health and com- 
fort, strength of body and peace of soul, lavished 
with unstinted generosity out pf the fulness of par- 
ental affection — these are things that can never be 
repaid in kind, they are repaid with the coin of filial 
piety and love, or they remain dead debts. 

Failure to meet these obligations brands one a 
reprobate. There is not, in all creation, bird or beast, 
but feels and shows instinctive affection towards 
those to whom it owes its being. He, therefore, 
who closes his heart to the promptings of filial love, 
has the consolation of knowing that, not only he does 
not belong to the order of human beings, but he places 
himself outside the pale of animal nature itself, and 
exists in a world of his own creation, which no human 
language is able to properly qualify 

The love we owe to our parents is next in quality 
to that which we owe to God and to ourselves. Love 
has a way of identifying its object and its subject; 
the lover and the beloved become one, their interests 
are common, their purpose alike. The dutiful child, 
therefore, looks upon its parent as another self, and 
remains indifferent to nothing that for weal or for 
woe affects that parent. Love consists in this com- 
munity of feeling, concern and interest. When the 
demon of selfishness drives gratitude out of the heart 
and the ties of natural sympathy become strained, 
and love begins to wane; when they are snapped 
asunder, love is dead. 

The love of God, of course, primes all other love. 
"He who loves father or mother more than me," says 
the Saviour, "is not worthy of me." Filial love, 
therefore, must not conflict with that which we owe 
to God ; it must yield, for it draws its force from the 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



latter and has no meaning without it. In normal 
conditions, this conflict never occurs ; it can occur 
only in the event of parents overriding the law that 
governs their station in life. To make divine love 
wait on the human is criminal. 

It may, and no doubt does, happen that parents 
become unlovable beings through disregard for the 
moral law. And because love is not a commodity 
that is made to order, children may be found who 
justify on these grounds their absence of affection 
or even their positive hatred for such parents. A 
drunken parent, one who attacks the life, virtue or 
reputation of his offspring, a low brute who has 
neither honor nor affection, and whose office it is 
to make home a living hell, such a one can hardly be 
loved. 

But pity is a form of love; and just as we may 
never despise a fallen parent, just so do we owe him 
or her, even in the depths of his or her degradation, 
a meed of pity and commiseration. There is no 
erring soul but may be reclaimed ; every soul is worth 
the price of its redemption, and there is no unfor- 
tunate, be he ever so low, but deserves, for the sake 
of his soul, a tribute of sympathy and a prayer for 
his betterment. And the child that refuses this^ how- 
ever just the cause of his aversion, offends against 
the law of nature, of charity and of God. 



CHAPTER LVIII. 

AUTHORITY AND OBEDIENCE. 

Authority means the right to 'command; to 
command is to exact obedience, and obedience is the 
submission of one's will to that of another. The 
will is a faculty that adores its own independence, is 



AUTHORITY AND OBEDIENCE. 



187 



ambitious of rule and dominion, and can hardly bear 
to serve. It is made free, and ma.y not bend; it is 
proud, and hates to bend; some will add, it is the 
dominant faculty in man, and therefore should not 
bend. 

Every man for himself ; we are born free ; all men 
are equal, and no one has the right to impose his will 
upon another; we are directly responsible to God, and 
"go-betweens" are repudiated by the common sense of 
mankind, — this is good Protestant theory and it is 
most convenient and acceptable to the unregenerate 
heart of man. We naturally like that kind of talk ; 
it appeals to us instinctively. It is a theory that 
possesses many merits besides that of being true in a 
sense in which only one takes it out of fifty who 
advocate it. 

But these advocates are careful — and the reason 
of their solicitude is anything but clear — to keep within 
the religious lines, and they never dare to carry their 
theory into the dom-ain of political society ; their hard 
common sense forbids. And they are likewise careful 
to prevent their children from practicing the doctrine 
within the realm of paternal authority, that is, if 
they have any children. Society calls it anarchy, and 
parents call it "unnatural cussedness ;" in religion it 
is "freedom of the children of God !" 

If there is authority, there must be obedience ; 
if one has the right to command, there arises in others 
the correlative duty and obligation to submit. There 
is no question of how this will suit us ; it simply does 
not, and will not, suit us; it is hard, painful and 
humiliating, but it is a fact^ and that is sufficient. 

Likewise, it is a fact that if authority was ever 
given by God to man, it was given to the parent ; all 
men, Protestants and anarchists alike, admit this. The 
social being and the religious being may reject and 
repudiate all law, but the child is subject to its parents, 
it must obey. Failing in this, it sins. 

Disobedience is always a sin, if it is disobedience. 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



that is, a refusal to submit, in things that are just, to 
the express command of paternal authority. The sin 
may be slight or grievous, the quality of its malice 
depending on the character of the refusal, of the 
things commanded and of the command itself. In 
order that the offense may be mortal, the refusal must 
be deliberate, containing an element of contempt, as 
all malicious disobedience does. The command must 
be express, peremptory, absolute. And nothing must 
be commanded done that may not reasonably be 
accomplished or is not within the sphere of parental 
jurisdiction or is contrary to the law of God. 

An order that is unreasonable or unlawful is 
invalid. Not only it may, but it should be, disregarded. 
It is not sufficient for a parent, wishing to oblige under 
pain of grievous sin, that he ask a thing done, that he 
express his mind on the matter ; he must order it and 
leave no room to doubt that he means what he says. 
There may be disobedience without this pereniptoriness 
of command, but it cannot be a serious fault. It is 
well also to make certain allowance for the levity and 
thoughtlessness of youth, especially in matters whose 
importance is beyond their comprehension. 

It is generally admitted that parental authority, 
exercised in things that concern good morals and the 
salvation of the soul, can scarcely ever be ignored 
without mortal offending. This means that besides the 
sin committed — if the prohibition touches matters of 
sin — there is a sin specifically different and a grievous 
one, of disobedience ; by reason of the parental 
prohibition, there are two sins, instead of one. This 
should be remembered by those who, against the 
express command of their parents, frequent bad 
companions, remain on the street at night, neglect 
their religious duty, etc. 

Parents have nothing to say in the choice their 
children make of a state in life, that is, they may 
suggest, but must not coerce. This is a matter that 
depends on personal tastes and the inner voicings of 



AUTHORITY AND OBEDIENCF 189 

the Spirit; having come to the age of manhood or 
womanhood, the party interested knows best what walk 
of Hfe will make him or her happy and salvation 
easier. It is therefore for them to choose, and their 
choice must be respected. In this they are not bound 
to obey the will of their parents, and if disinclined to 
do so, should not. 



CHAPTER LIX. 

SHOULD WE HELP OUR PARENTS? 

Tee ERE are few things more evident to natural 
reason than the obligation children are under to assist 
their parents when necessity knocks at their door, and 
finding them unable to meet its harsh demands, presses 
them with the goad of misery and want. Old age is 
weak and has to lean on strength and youth for 
support; like childhood, it is helpless. Accidentally, 
misfortune may render a parent dependent and needy. 
In such contingencies, it is not for neighbors, friends 
or relatives to come in and lend a helping hand; this 
duty devolves on the offspring, on them first and on 
them alone. 

Charity is not alone to prescribe this office of 
piety. A stronger law than charity has a claim in the 
matter, and that is the law of justice. Justice demands 
a "quid pro quo," it exacts a just compensation for 
services rendered. Even though there be no agreement 
between parents and offspring, and the former gave 
without a thought of return, nature records a contract, 
by the terms of which parents in want are entitled to 
the same support from their children as the latter 
received from them in the days of their helplessness. 

Those who do not live up to the terms of this 
natural contract stand amenable to the justice of 



190 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Heaven. The obligation follows them during life, 
wherever they go ; and they can no more shirk it than 
they can efface the characters that declare it, graven 
on their hearts. Nothing but sheer impossibility can 
dispense them. 

So sacred and inviolable is this obligation that it 
passes before that of assisting wife and children, the 
necessity being equal; for filial obligations enjoy the 
distinction of priority. Not even engagements 
contracted before God hold against the duty of 
relieving parental distress and want, for vows are of 
counsel and must yield to the dictates of natural and 
divine law. 

Of course, the gravity of this obligation is 
proportionate to the stress of necessity under which 
parents labor. To constitute a mortal sin of neglect, 
it is not necessary that a parent be in the extreme of 
privation and beggary. It is not easy to draw the line 
between slight and grievous offending in this matter, 
but if some young men and women examined their 
conscience as carefully as they do their new spring 
suits and hats, they would find material for confession 
the avowal of which might be necessary to confessional 
integrity. 

It has become the fashion with certain of the rising 
generation, after draining the family exchequer for 
some sixteen or eighteen years, to emancipate them- 
selves as soon as their wages cover the cost of living, 
with a little surplus. They pay their board, that is to 
say, they stand towards their parents as a stranger 
would, and forgetting the debt their younger years 
have piled up against them, they hand over a miserable 
pittance just enough to cover the expenses of bed and 
board. This might, and possibly does, make them 
"feel big," but that feeling is a false one, and the 
"bigness" experienced is certainty not in their moral 
worth, in many cases such conduct is a prevarication 
aginst the law of God. This applies with equal force to 
young women whose vanity overrides the claims of 



SHOULD WE HELP OUR PARENTS? IQI 

chatrity and justice, and who are said to "put all their 
earnings on their backs," while they eat the bread that 
another earns. 

Frequently children leave home and leave all 
their obligations to their parents behind them at home. 
If their letters are rare, enclosed checks are still rarer. 
They like to keep the old folks informed of the fact 
that it costs a good deal to live away from home. They 
sometimes come home on a visit; but these are visits] 
and visitors, even if they do stay quite a while, do 
not pay board. 

But pecuniary assistance is not all ; it is occasionally 
care and attention an aged parent requires, the presence 
of a daughter who prefers the gaiety of the city to the 
quiet of the old homestead that is imperiously 
demanded. If the parent be feeble or sick, the 
undutiful child is criminally negligent ; the crime is still 
greater if there be danger through that absence of the 
parent's dying without religious consolation. 

I have said nothing of that unnatural specimen of 
humanity, sometimes called a "loafer," and by still 
more ignoble names, who, to use a vulgar term, 
"grubs" on his parents, drinks what he earns and 
befouls the home he robs, with his loathsome presence 
and scandalous living. The least said of him the 
better. He exists : 'tis already too much said. 



CHAPTER LX. 

DISINTERESTED LOVE IN PARENTS. 

Love seems to resume all the obligations of parents 
toward their offspring; certainly, it directs all their 
actions, and they fulfil these obligations ill or well 
according to the quality of that love. But love is 



192 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



hot sufficient; love is of two kinds, the right and the 
wrong; nothing good comes of an affection that is 
not properly ordered. In itself, parental love is natural, 
instinctive ; therefore it is not meritorious to any high 
degree. But there is much merit in the proper kind 
of parental affection, because it requires sacrifice. 

There may be too little love, to the neglect and 
misfortune of children. There may be too much, to 
their spoiling and utter perversion. Again there 
may be affection that is partial, that singles out one 
for caresses and favors to the exclusion of the others ; 
hence discord and dissensions in the family. The 
first two forms of inordinate affection are equally bad, 
while the last combines both and contains the double 
£vil thereof. It is hard to say which is the worse 
off, the child that receives too much or the one that 
receives too little of that love which to be correct 
should avoid extremes. 

Parents are apt, under the sway of natural 
affection, to overlook the fact that God has rights over 
the children, and that the welfare and interests of the 
children must not be left outside all consideration: 
herein lies the root of all the evil that befalls the 
family through degenerate love. What is commonly, 
but improperly, called love is either pagan fondness 
or simon-pure egotism and self-love. 

When a vain person looks into a mirror, she (if 
it be a ''she") will immediately fall in love with the 
image, because it is an image of herself. And a selfish 
parent sees in his child, not another being, but himself, 
and he loves it for himself. His affection is not an 
act of generosity, as it shoula be, but an act of self- 
indulgence. He does not seek to please another, he 
seeks to please himself. His love, therefore, is noth- 
ing but concentrated vanity — and that is the wrong 
kind. 

Such a parent will neglect a less favored child, 
and he will so far dote on the corporal and physical 
object of his devotion as to forget there is a soul 



DISINTERESTED LOVE IN PARENTS. 



within. He will account all things good that flatter 
his conceit, and all things evil that disturb the 
voluptuousness of his attachment. He owns that child, 
and he is going to make it the object of his eternal 
delights, God's rights and the child's own interests to 
the contrary notwithstanding. This fellow is not a 
parent; he is a pure animal, and the cub will one day 
make good returns for services rendered. 

A parent with a growing-up family, carefully 
reared and expensively educated, v/ill often lay clever 
plans and dream elaborate dreams of a golden future 
from which it would almost be cruelty to awake him. 
He sees his pains and toils requited a thousand fold, 
his disbursements yielding a high rate of interest and 
the name his children bear — his name — respected and 
honored. In all this there is scarcely anything blame- 
worthy; but the trouble comes when the views of the 
Almighty fail to square with the parental views. 

Symptoms of the malady then reveal themselves. 
Misfortunes are met with complaints and murmurings 
against Providence and the manner in which it runs 
the cosmic machine. Being usually self-righteous, 
such parents bring up the old discussion as to the 
justice of the divine plan by which the good suffer 
and the wicked prosper in this world. Sorrow in 
bereavement is legitimate and sacred, but when wounded 
love vents its wrath on the Almighty, the limit is 
passed, and then we say: ''Such love is love only in 
name, love must respect the rights of God ; if it does 
not, it is something else." The Almighty never 
intended children to be a paying investment ; it belongs 
to Him to call children to Himself as well as parents 
themselves, when He feels like it. Parents who ignore 
this do not give their children the love the latter have 
a right to expect. 

Intelligent and Christian parents, therefore, need 
to understand the true status of the offspring, and 
should make careful allowance for children's own 
interests, both material and spiritual, and for the all- 



194 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



supreme rights of God in the premises. Since true 
love seeks to do good, in parents it should first never 
lose sight of the child's soul and the means to help 
him save it. Without this all else is labor lost. God 
frowns on such unchristian affection, and He usually 
sees to it that even in this world the reaping be accord- 
ing to the sowing. 

The rearing of a child is the making or unmaking 
of a man or woman. Love is the motive power behind 
this enterprise. That is why we insist on the disinter- 
estedness of parental love, before touching on the all- 
important question of education. 



CHAPTER LXI. 
EDUCATE THE CHILDREN. 

Before reaching the age of reason, the child's 
needs are purely animal ; it requires to be fed, clothed 
and provided with the general necessities of life. 
Every child has a natural right that its young life be 
fostered and protected; the giver must preserve his 
gift, otherwise his gift is vain. To neglect this duty 
is a sin, not precisely against the fourth, but rather 
against the fifth, commandment which treats of killing 
and kindred acts. 

When the mind begins to open and the reason- 
ing faculties to develop, the duty of educating the 
child becomes incumbent on the parent. As its 
physical, so its intellectual, being must be trained and 
nourished. And by educa/tion is here meant the 
training of the young mind, the bringing out of its 
mental powers and the acquisition of useful knowl- 
edge, without reference to anything moral or relig- 
ious. This latter feature — the most important of 
all deserves especial attention. 



EDUCATE THE CHILDREN. 



Concerning the culture of the mind, it is a fact, 
recognized by all, that in this era of popular rights 
and liberties, no man can expect to make anything 
but a meagre success of life, if he does that much, 
without at least a modicum of knowledge and intel- 
lectual training. This is an age in which brains are 
at a high premium; and although brains are by no 
means the monopoly of the cultured class, they must 
be considered as non-existent if they are not brought 
out by education. Knowledge is what counts now- 
adays. Even in the most common walks of life 
advancement is impossible without it. This is one 
reason why parents, who have at heart the future 
success and well-being of their children, should strive 
to give them as good an education as their means 
allow. 

Their happiness here is also concerned. If he 
be ignorant and untaught, a man will be frowned 
at, laughed at, and be made in many ways, in contact 
with his fellow-men, to feel the overwhelming 
inferiority of his position. He will be made unhappy, 
unless he chooses to keep out of the way of those 
who know something and associate with those who 
know nothing — in which case he is very liable to 
feel lonesome. 

He is moreover deprived of the positive comforts 
and happiness that education affords. Neither books 
nor public questions will interest him; his leisure 
moments will be a time of idleness and unbearable 
tedium ; a whole world — the world of the mind — will 
be closed to him, with its joys, pleasures and com- 
forts which are many. 

Add to this the fact that the Maker never intended 
that the noble faculty of the intelligence should 
remain an inert element in the life of His creature, 
that this precious talent should remain buried in the 
flesh of animal nature. Intelligence alone distin- 
guishes us from the brute; we are under obligation 
to perfect our humanity. And since education is a 



196 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



means of doing this, we owe it to our nature that we 
educate ourselves and have educated those who are 
under our care. 

How long should the child be kept at school? 
The law provides that every child attend school until 
it reaches the age of fourteen. This law appears to 
be reasona.ble and just, and we think that in ordinary 
circumstances it has the power to bind in conscience. 
The parent therefore who neglects to keep children 
at school we account guilty of sin, and of grievous 
sin, if the neglect be notable. 

Outside this provision of the law, we think 
children should be kept at school as long as it is pos- 
sible and prudent to do so. This depends, of course, 
on the means and resources of the parents. They are 
under no obligation to give to their children an edu- 
cation above what their means allow. Then, the apti- 
tudes, physical and mental, of the child are a factor 
to be considered. Poor health or inherited weakness 
may forbid a too close application to studies, while 
it may be a pure waste of time and money to keep 
at school a child that will not profit by the advantage 
offered. It is better to put such a child at work as 
soon as possible. As says the philosopher of Archey 
Road: "You may lead a young man to the university, 
but you cannot make him learn." 

Outside these contingencies, we think every child 
has a right to a common school education, such as 
is given in our system under the high school, whether 
it be fourteen years of age or over. Reading and 
writing, grammar and arithmetic, history and 
geography, these a.re the fundamental and essential 
elements of a common school education; and in our 
time and country, a modicum of information on these 
subjects is necessary for the future well-being, success 
and happiness of our children. And since parents 
are bound to care for the future of their children, we 
consider them likewise bound to give them such an 
education as will insure these blessings. 



CHAPTER LXII. 



EDUCATIONAL EXTRAVAGANCE. 

Our public educational system is made up of a 
grammar and a high school course, the latter consist- 
ing of a four years term of studies, devoted in part, 
to a more thorough grounding in the essentials of 
education; the other part — by far the more consider- 
able, according to the consensus of opinion — is 
expended on educational frills and vanities. These 
"trimmings" are given gratis, the public bearing the 
burden of expense, which foots up to a very respect- 
able total. 

For a certain class of people — the people of 
means — this sort of a thing has not many disadvan- 
tages ; it is in a line with the future occupation or 
profession of their offspring. But for the bulk of 
the children who attend our free schools and on 
whose parents educational taxes are levied, it has 
serious inconveniences, is not in line with their future 
occupation or profession, is not only superfluous, but 
detrimental. It is for them so much time lost — 
precious time, that were better spent learning a trade 
or otherwise fitting themselves for their life work. 
Herein therefore we discover a double extravagance: 
that of parents who provide unwisely for their 
children's future and that of the municipality which 
offers as popular an education that is anything but 
popular, since only the few can enjoy it while all must 
bear the burden alike. 

There is much in getting a start in life, in 
beginning early ; a delay is often a handicap hard to 
overcome. With very few exceptions, our children 



198 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



gain their livelihood with their hands and eyes and 
ears, and not solely with their brains ; they therefore 
require the most practical education imaginable. They 
need intellectual tools to work with, and not a smat- 
tering of science, botany, drawing and political 
philosophy to forget as soon as possible. Pure 
culture studies are not a practical gain for them, 
while the time consumed in pursuing these is so much 
taken away from a thorough training in the essen- 
tials. Lectures on science, elementary experiments in 
chemistry, kindergarten instructions in water color 
painting, these are as much in their place in the 
education of the average child as an ivory-handled 
gold pen in the hand that wields the pick-ax. 

A boy is better off learning a trade than cramming 
his head full of culture fads ; he is then doing some- 
thing useful and profitable on which the happiness 
and success of his life will depend. By the time his 
companions have done dabbling in science and have 
come to the conclusion that they are simply being 
shown how ignorant they are — not a very consoling 
conclusion after all — he will have already laid the 
foundation of his career and be earning enough to 
settle down in life. He may not be able to talk on 
an infinity of subjects about which he knows nothing 
at all, but he will be able to earn his own living, 
which is something worth while. 

If the free high school were more of a business 
school, people would get better returns for their 
money. True, some would then be obliged to pay 
for the expensive fads that would be done away with ; 
but since they alone enjoy these things, why should 
others be made to pay for them who cannot enjoy 
them? Why should the poor be taxed to educate the 
rich? Why not give the poor full value for their 
share of the burden? Why not provide them with 
intellectual tools that suit their condition, just as the 
rich are being provided for in the present system? 

The parochial high school has, in several places 



EDUCATIONAL EXTRAVAGANCE. IQQ 

we know of, been made to serve as a protest against 
such evils and as an example that has already been 
followed in more than one instance by the public 
schools. Intelligent and energetic pastors, knowing 
full well the conditions and needs of their people, 
offer the children a course in business methods as 
being more suitable, more profitable and less extrav- 
agant than four years spent in acquiring a smattering 
of what they will never possess thoroughly and never 
need in their callings in life. It is better to fill young 
minds with the useful than with the agreeable, when 
it is impossible to furnish both. Results already 
bespeak the wisdom of this plan and reflect no small 
honor on its originators. 

Parents therefore should see to it thait their 
children get the kind of education they need, the kind 
that will serve them best in after life. They should 
not allow the precious time of youth to be whiled 
away in trifles and vanities. Children have a right 
to be educated in a manner in keeping with their 
conditions in life, and it is criminal in parents to 
neglect the real needs of their children while trying 
to fit them for positions they will never occupy. 

In the meantime, let them protest against the 
extravagance of educational enthusiasts and excessive 
State paternalism. Let them ask that the burden of 
culture studies be put where it belongs, that is, on the 
shoulders of those who are the sole beneficiaries ; and 
that free popular education be made popular, that is, 
for all, and not for an elite of society. The public 
school system was called into existence to do one 
work, namely, to educate the masses: it was never 
intended to furnish a college education for the bene- 
fit of the rich men's sons at the expense of the poor. 
As it stands to-day, it is an unadulterated 
extravagance. 



CHAPTER LXIII. 



GODLESS EDUCATION. 

The other defect, respecting education as found 
in the pubHc schools of the land, is that it leaves the 
soul out of all consideration and relegates the idea 
of God to a background of silent contempt. On this 
subject we can do no better than quote wisdom from 
the Fathers of the Third Plenary Council of 
Baltimore. 

"Few, if any, will deny that a sound civilization 
must depend upon sound popular education. But 
education, in order to be sound and to produce 
beneficial results, must develop what is best in man, 
a.nd make him not only clever, but good. A one-sided 
education will develop a one-sided life ; and such a 
life will surely topple over, and so will every social 
system that is built up of such lives. True civiliza- 
tion requires that not only the physical and intel- 
lectual, but also the moral and religious, well-being of 
the people should be improved, and at least with 
equal care. 

"It camnot be desirable or advantageous that 
religion should be excluded from the school. On the 
contrary, it ought to be there one of the chief agencies 
for moulding the young life to all that is true and 
virtuous, and holy. To shut religion out of the 
school, and keep it for home and the Church, is, 
logically, to train up a generation that will consider 
religion good for home and the Church, but not for 
the practical business of real life. A life is not 
dwarfed, but ennobled, by being lived in the presence 
of God. 



GODLESS EDUCATION. 



20I 



"The avowed enemies of Christianity in some 
European countries are banishing religion from the 
schools (they have done it since) in order to elimi- 
nate it gradually from among the people. In this 
they are logical. Take away religion from the school, 
and you take it away from the people. Take it away 
from the people, and morality will soon follow; 
morality gone, even their physical condition will ere 
long degenerate into corruption which breeds decrep- 
itude, while their intellectual attainments would only 
serve as a light to guide them to deeper depths of 
vice and ruin. A civilization without religion would 
be a civilization of 'the struggle for existence, and the 
survival of the fittest,' in which cunning and strength 
would become the substitutes for principle, virtue, 
conscience and duty." 

One of the things the Catholic Church fears least 
in this country is Protestantism. She considers it 
harmless, moribund, in the throes of disintegration. 
It never has, cannot and never will thrive long where 
it has to depend on something other than wealth and 
political power. It has unchurched millions, is still 
unchurching at a tremendous rate, and will end by 
unchurching itself. The godless school has done its 
work for Protestantism, and done it well. Its dearest 
enemy could not wish for better results. 

Popular education comes more and more to mean 
popularized irreligion. The future struggles of the 
Church will be with Agnosticism and Infidelity — the 
product of the godless public school. And without 
pretending to be prophets or sons of prophets, we 
Catholics can foresee the day when godless education, 
after making bad Christians, will make bad citizens. 
And because no civilization worthy of the name has 
ever subsisted, or can subsist, without religion, the 
maintenance of this system of popular and free 
government will devolve on the product of Christian 
education, and its perpetuity will depend upon the 
generations turned out of the religious school. 



202 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



The most substantial protest the CathoHc Church 
offers against godless education is the system of her 
parochial schools ; and this alone is sufficient to give 
an idea of the importance of this question. From 
headquarters comes the order to erect Catholic schools 
in every parish in this land as soon as the thing can 
be done. This means a tremendous amount of work, 
and a tremendous expense. It means a competition 
on educational grounds with the greatest, richest and 
most powerful nation in the world. The game must 
be worth the candle ; there must be some proportion 
between the end and the means. 

The Catholic Church has the wisdom of ages to 
learn from; and when she embarks on an enterprise 
of this kind, even her bitterest enemies can afford to 
take it for granted that there is something behind it. 
And there is. There is her very life, which depends 
on the fidelity of her children. And her children 
are lost to her and to God unless she fosters religion 
in her young. Let parents share this solicitude of 
the Church for the little ones, and beware of the 
dangers of the godless school. 



CHAPTER LXIV. 

CATHOLIC SCHOOLS. 

The Catholic school system all over this land has 
been erected and stands dedicated to the principle that 
no child can be properly, thoroughly and profitably 
— for itself — educated, whose soul is not fed with 
religion and morality while its intelligence is being 
stocked with learning and knowledge. It is intended, 
and made, to avoid the two defects under which our 
public school system labors — the one accidental, the 



CATHOLIC SCHOOLS. 



203 



other fundamental—namely, extravagance and god- 
lessness. The child is taught the things that are 
necessary for it to know ; catechism and religion take 
the place of fads and costly frills. 

The Catholic school does not lay claim to 
superiority over another on purely secular lines, 
although in many cases its superiority is a very patent 
fact; it repudiates and denies charges to the effect 
that it is inferior, although this may be found in some 
cases to be true. It contends that it is equal to, as 
good as, any other; and there is no evidence why 
this should not be so. But it does pretend to give 
a more thorough education in the true sense of the 
word, if education really means a bringing out of 
that which is best in our nature. 

Neither do we hold that such a training as our 
schools provide will assure the faith and salvation of 
the children confided to our care. Neither church, 
nor religion, nor prayer, nor grace, nor God Himself 
will do this alone. The child's fidelity to God and its 
ultimate reward depends on that child's efforts and 
will, which nothing can supply. But what we do 
guarantee is that the child will be furnished with 
what is necessary to keep the faith and save its soul, 
that there will be no one to blame but itself if it fails, 
and that such security it will not find outside the 
Catholic school. It is for just such work that the 
school is equipped, that is the only reason for its 
existence, and we are not by any means prepared 
to confess that our system is a failure in that feature 
which is its essential one. 

That every Catholic child has an inherent right 
to such a training, it is not for one moment permitted 
to doubt ; there is nothing outside the very bread that 
keeps its body and soul together to which it has a 
better right. Intellectual training is a very secondary 
matter when the immortal soul is concerned. And if 
the child has this right, there is a corresponding duty 
in the parent to provide it with such ; and since that 



204 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



right is inalienable, that duty is of the gravest. Hence 
it follows that parents who neglect the opportunity 
they enjoy of providing their offspring with a sound 
religious and moral training in youth, and expose 
them, unprepared, to the attacks, covert and open, 
of modern indifferentism, while pursuing secular 
studies, display a woeful ignorance of their obligations 
and responsibilities. 

This natural right of the child to a religious 
education, and the authority of the Church which 
speaks in no uncertain accents on the subject go to 
make a general law that imposes a moral obligation 
upon parents to send their children to Catholic schools. 
Parents who fail in this simply do wrong, and in 
many cases cannot be excused from mortal ofifending. 
And it requires, according to the general opinion, a 
very serious reason to justify non-compliance with 
this law. 

Exaggeration, of course, never serves any 
purpose ; but when we consider the personal rights of 
children to have their spiritual life well nurtured, 
and the general evils against which this system of 
education has been judged necessary to make the 
Church secure, it will be easily seen that there is little 
fear of over-estimating the importance of the question 
and the gravity of the obligations under which 
parents are placed. 

Moreover, disregard for this general law on the 
part of pa»rents involves contempt of authority, which 
contempt, by reason of its being public, cannot escape 
the malice of scandal. Even when the early religious 
education of the child is safeguarded by excellent 
home training and example and no evil effects of 
purely secular education are to be feared, the fact 
of open resistance to the direction of Church authority 
is an evil in itself ; and may be the cause of leading 
others in the same path of revolt — others who have 
not like circumstances in their favor. 

About the only person I know who might be 



CATHOLIC SCHOOLS. 



205 



justified in not sending his children to CathoHc schools 
is the "crank," that creature of mulish propensities, 
who balks and kicks and will not be persuaded to 
move by any method of reasoning so far discovered. 
He usually knows all that is to be learned on the 
school question — which is a lie ; and having compared 
the parochial and the public school systems in an 
intelligent and disinterested manner — which is another 
— he finds that the Catholic school is not the place for 
his children. If his children are like himself^ his 
conclusion is wisely formed, albeit drawn from false 
premises. In him, three things are on a par; his 
conceit, his ignorance and his determination. From 
these three ingredients results a high quality of 
asininity which in moral theology is called invincible 
ignorance and is said to render one immune in maitters 
of sin. May his tribe decrease! 



CHAPTER LXV. 

SOME WEAK POINTS IN THE CATHOLIC 
SCHOOL SYSTEM. 

Some parents claim that their children do not 
learn anything in the Catholic school. It is good 
policy always to accept this statement as true in all 
its parts ; it may be true, and it is never good to deny 
the truth. All are not equally endowed with brains 
in this world. If a child has it dinned into his ears 
that the school he attends is inferior, he will come 
to be convinced of the fact ; and being convinced, he 
will set to work verifying it, in his case, at least. 
Heredity may have something to do with it; children 
are sometimes "chips of the old block," — a great 



2o6 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



misfortune in many cases, handicapping them in the 
race of life. It is well, therefore, not to claim too 
much for our schools. We concede the point. 

Another parent thinks that because he went 
through the public schools and kept the faith in his 
day, his children may be trusted to do the same. This 
objection has a serious front to it. It does seem 
strange that children should not walk in the footsteps 
of their worthy parents ; but the fact is, and facts are 
stubborn things, the fact is that they do not always 
act thus. And they might tell you, to justify their 
unseemly conduct, that the conditions that obtained 
in life in olden days are not the same as at present; 
that there were no parochial schools then to offer a 
choice in matters of education and that kind Providence 
might have taken this into consideration: that it was 
the custom in those days for children to imitate the 
rugged virtues of their parents struggling against 
necessity on one hand and bigotry on the other; but 
that through the powerful influence of money, the 
progeny of the persecuted may now hobnob with the 
progeny of the bigot, and the association is not always 
the best thing in the world for the faith and religious 
convictions of the former, unless these convictions 
are well grounded in youth. The parent therefore 
who kept the faith with less had a very considerable 
advantage over his child who apparently has more 
privileges, but also more temptations and dangers. 
The objection does not look so serious now. 

Of course there is the question of social standing 
— a very important matter with some parents of the 
"nouveau riche" type. A fop will gauge a man's 
worth by the size of his purse or the style and cut of 
the coat he wears. There are parents who would not 
mind their children's sitting beside a little darkey, 
but who do object most strenuously to their occupying 
the same bench with a dirty little Irish child. A 
calico dress or a coat frayed at the edges are certainly 
not badges of high social standing, but they are not 



THE CATHOLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. 20j 



incompatible with honesty, purity, industry and respect 
for God, which things create a wholesome atmosphere 
to live in and make the world better in every sense 
of the word. There is no refinement in these little 
ones, to speak of, not even the refinement of vice. 
There is something in the air they breathe that kills 
the germ of vice. The discipline considers sin a worse 
evil than ignorance of social amenities, and virtue 
and goodness as far superior to etiquette and 
distinction of manners. If a different appreciation of 
things is entertained, we grant the inferiority of our 
schools. 

"But then, it is so very un-American, you know, 
to maintain separate schools in opposition to an 
institution so intensely American as our public school 
system. This state of affairs fosters creed prejudices 
that it is the duty of every true American to help 
destroy. The age of religious differences is past, and 
the parochial school is a perpetual reminder of things 
of the past that were best forgotten." 

We deny that the system that stands for no relig- 
ious or moral training is intensely American. This is a 
Christian land. If our denial cannot be sustained, w^e 
consider such a system radically wrong and detri- 
mental to the best interests of the country; and we 
protest against it, just as some of us protest against 
imperialism, high tariff and monometalism. It is 
wrong, bad, therefore un-American. 

We also claim that the Protestant propaganda 
that is being carried on under the guise of non-sectarian 
education is unspeakably unjust and outrageous. 
Protestantism is not a State institution in this country. 
A stranger might think so by the way public shekels 
are made to serve the purposes of proselytism; but 
to make the claim, in theory, or in practise, is to go 
counter to the laws of this land, and is un-American 
to a degree. That is another un-Americanism we 
protest against. 

We teach truth, not creed prejudices; we train 



2o8 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



our children to have and always maintain a strong 
prejudice for religious truth, and that kind of 
prejudice is the rock-bed of all that is good and holy 
and worth living for. We teach dogma. We do not 
believe in religion without dogma, any more than 
religion without truth. "That kind of religion has 
not been invented, but it will come in when we have 
good men without convictions, parties without 
principles and geometry without theories." 

If there is anything un-American in all this, it 
is because the term is misunderstood and misapplied. 
We are sorry if others find us at odds on religious 
grounds. The fact of our existence will always be a 
reminder of our differences with them in the past. 
But we are not willing to cease to exist on that 
account. 



CHAPTER LXVI. 
CORRECTION. 

Among the many things that are good for 
children and that parents are in duty bound to supply 
is — the rod! This may sound old-fashioned, and it 
unfortunately is ; there is a new school of home 
discipline in vogue nowadays. 

Slippers have outgrown their iisefulness as 
implements of persuasion, being now employed 
exclusively as foot-gear. The lissom birch thrives 
ungamered in the thicket, where grace and gentleness 
supply the whilom vigor of its sway. The unyielding 
barrel-stave, that formerly occupied a place of honor 
and convenience in the household, is now relegated, a 
harmless thing, to a forgotten corner of the cellar, 
and no longer points a moral but adorns a wood-pile. 
Disciplinary applications of the old type have fallen 



CORRECTION. 



209 



into innocuous desuetude ; the penny now tempts, the 
sugar candy soothes and sugar-coated promises entice 
when the rod should quell and blister. Meanwhile 
the refractory urchin, with no fear to stimulate his 
sluggish conscience, chuckles, rejoices and is glad, 
and bethinks himself of some uninvented methods of 
devilment. 

Yes, it is old-fashioned in these days to smite 
with the rattan as did the mighty of yore. The custom 
certainly lived a long time. The author of the 
Proverbs spoke of the practise to the parents of his 
generation, and there is no mistaking the meaning of 
his words. He spoke with authority, too; if we 
mistake not, it was the Holy Ghost that inspired his 
utterances. Here are a few of his old-fashioned 
sayings : "Spare the rod and spoil the child ; he who 
loves his child spares not the rod ; correction gives 
judgment to the child who ordinarily is incapable of 
reflection; if the child be not chastised, it will bring 
down shame and disgrace upon the head of its parent." 
It is our opinion that authority of this sort should 
redeem the defect of antiquity under which the 
teaching itself labors. There are some things ''ever 
ancient, ever new f this is one of them. 

The philosophy of correction may be found in the 
doctrine of original sin. Every child of Adam has a 
nature that is corrupted ; it is a soil in which pride in 
all its forms and with all its cortege of vices takes 
strong and ready root. This growth crops out into 
stubbornness, selfishness, a horror of restraint, effort 
and self-denial ; mischief, and a spirit of rebellion and 
destruction. In its native state, untouched by the 
rod of discipline, the child is wild. Now, you must 
force a crooked tree to grow straight ; you must break 
a wild colt to domesticate it, and you must whip a. 
wild boy to make him fit for the company of civilized 
people. Being self-willed, he will seek to follow the 
bent of his own inclinations ; without intelligence or 
experience and by nature prone to evil, he will follow 



2IO 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



the wrong path; and the habits acquired in youth, 
the faults developed he will carry through Hfe to his 
own and the misery of others. He therefore requires 
training and a substitute for judgment; and according 
to the Holy Ghost, the rod furnishes both. In the 
majority of cases nothing can supply it. 

This theory has held good in all the ages of the 
world, and unless the species has ''evolved" by 
extraordinary leaps and bounds within the last fifty 
3^ears, it holds good to-day, modern nursery milk-and- 
honey discipline to the contrary notwithstanding. It 
may be hard on the youngster — it was hard on us ! — 
but the difficulty is only temporary; and difficulty, 
some genius has said, is the nurse of greatness, a 
harsh nurse, who roughly rocks her foster-children 
into strength and athletic proportions. 

The great point is that this treatment be given 
in time, when it is possible to administer it with 
success and fruit. The ordinary child does not need 
oft-repeated doses ; a firm hand and a vigorous appli- 
cation go a long way, in most cases. Half-hearted, 
milk-and-water castigation, like physic, should be 
thrown to the dogs. Long threatenings spoil the 
operation; they betray weakness which the child is 
the first to discover. And without being brutal, it is 
well that the chastisement be such as will Unger 
somewhat longer in the memory than in the sensibility. 

The defects that deserve this corrective especially 
are insubordination, sulkiness and sullenness ; it is 
good to stir up the lazy ; it is necessary to instil in the 
child's mind a saving sense of its own inferiority and 
to inculcate lessons of humility, self-effacement and 
self-denial. It should scourge dishonesty and lying. 
The bear licks its cub into shape; let the parent go 
to the bear, inquire of its ways and be wise. His 
children will then have a moral shape and a form 
of character that will stand them in good stead in after 
life ; and they will give thanks in proportion to the 
pain inflicted during the process of formation. 



CHAPTER LXVII. 



JUSTICE AND RIGHTS. 

Justice is a virtue by which we render unto every 
man that which to him is due. Among equals, it 
is called commutative justice, the which alone is here 
in question. It protects us in the enjoyment of our 
own rights, and imposes upon us the obligation of 
respecting the rights of our fellow-men. This, of 
course, supposes that we have certain rights and that 
we know what a right is. But what is a right? 

The word itself may be clearer in the minds of 
many than its definition; few ignore what a right is, 
and fewer still perhaps could say clearly and correctly 
what they mean by the word. A right is not some- 
thing that you can see and feel and smell: it is a 
moral faculty, that is, a recognized, inviolable power 
or liberty to do something, to hold or obtain possession 
of something. Where the right of property is 
concerned, it supposes a certain relation or connection 
between a person and an object ; this may be a relation 
of natural possession, as in the case of life or 
reputation, a relation of lawful acquisition, as that 
of the goods of life, etc. Out of this relation springs 
a title, just and proper, by which I may call that 
object "mine," or you, "yours ownership is thereby 
established of the object and conceded to the party in 
question. This party is therefore said to have a right 
to the object ; and the right is good, whether he is in 
possession or not thereof. Justice respects this right, 
respects the just claims and titles of the owner, and 
forbids every act injurious thereto. 

All this pre-supposes the idea of God, and without 
that idea, there can be no justice and no rights. 



212 



3»I0RAL BRIEFS. 



properly so-called. Justice is based on the conformity 
of all things with the will of God. The will of God 
is that we attain to everlasting happiness in the next 
world through the means of an established order of 
things in this life. This world is so ruled, and our 
nature is such, that certain means are either absolutely 
or relatively necessary for the attaining of that end ; 
for example, life, reputation, liberty, the pursuit of 
happiness in the measure of our lawful capacity. The 
obligation therefore to reach that end gives us the 
right to use these means ; and God places in every 
soul the virtue of justice so that this right may be 
respected. 

But it must be understood that the rights of God 
towards us transcend all other rights that we may 
have towards our fellow-men ; ours we enjoy under 
the high dominion of Him who grants all rights. 
Consequently, in the pursuit of justice for ourselves, 
our rights cease the moment they come into 
antagonism with the superior rights of God as found 
in His Law. No man has a right to do what is evil, 
not even to preserve that most inalienable and sacred 
of all rights, his right to life. To deny this is to 
destroy the very notion of justice ; the restrictions of 
our rights are more sacred than those rights 
themselves. 

Violation of rights among equals is called 
injustice. This sin has a triple malice ; it attacks the 
liberty of fellow-men and destroys it; it attacks the 
order of the world and the basis of society ; it attacks 
the decree and mandate of the Almighty who wills 
that this world shall be run on the plan of justice. 
Injustice is therefore directly a sin against man, and 
indirectly a crime against God. 

So jealous is God of the rights of His creatures 
that He never remains satisfied until full justice is 
done for every act of injustice. Charity may be 
wounded, and the fault condoned ; but only reparation 
in kind will satisfy justice. Whatever is mine is mine, 



JUSTICE AND RIGHTS. 



213 



and mine it will ever remain, wherever in this world 
another may have betaken himself with it. As long 
as it exists it will appeal to me as to its master and 
owner; if justice is not done in this world, then it 
will appeal to the justice of Heaven for vengeance. 

The six last commandments treat of the rights 
of man and condemn injustice. We are told to respect 
the life, the virtue, the goods and the reputation of our 
fellow-men ; we are commanded to do so not only in 
act, but also in thought and desire. Life is protected 
by the fifth, virtue by the sixth and ninth, property 
by the seventh and tenth, and reputation by the eighth. 
To sin against any of these commandments is to sin 
against justice in one form or another. 

The claims, however, of violated justice are not 
such as to exact the impossible in order to repair an 
injury done. A dead man cannot be brought back to 
life, a penniless thief cannot make restitution unless 
he steals from somebody else, etc., etc. But he who 
finds himself thus physically incapable of undoing the 
wrongs committed must have at least the will and 
intention of so doing: to revoke such intention would 
be to commit a fresh sin of injustice. The alternative 
is to do penance, either willingly in this life, or forcibly 
in the purging flames of the sufifering Church in the 
next. In that way, some time or other, justice, 
according to the plan of God, will be done; but He 
will never be satisfied until it is done. 



CHAPTER LXVni. 

HOMICIDE. 

To kill is to take life, human or animal. It was 
once thought by a sect of crazy fanatics, that the Fifth 
Commandment applied to the killing of animals as 



214 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



well as of men. When a man slays a man, he slays 
an equal; when he kills an animal, he kills a creature 
made to serve him and to be his food; and raw meat 
is not always palatable, and to cook is to kill. 
"Everything that moves and lives," says Holy Writ, 
"shall be unto 3^ou as food." 

The killing therefore herein question is the taking 
of human life, or homicide. There can be no doubt 
but that life is man's best and most precious possession, 
and that he has an inborn right to live as long as 
nature's laws operate in his favor. But man is not 
master of that gift of life, either in himself or in 
others. God, who alone can give, alone may take it 
away. Sole master of life. He deals it out to His 
creatures as it pleases Him ; and whoever tampers 
with human life intrudes upon the domain of the 
Divinity, violating at the some time the first right of 
his fellow-man. 

We have an instinctive horror of blood, human 
blood. For the ordinar}^ individual the Mosaic 
enactment that forbids murder is almost superfluous, 
so deepl}^ has nature graven on our hearts the letter 
of that law. Murder is abominable, for the very reason 
that life is precious ; and no reasonable being, civilized 
or savage, dealing death unjustly unto a fellow-man, 
can have any other conviction in his soul than that he is 
committing a crime and incurring the almighty wrath 
of the Deity. If such killing is done by a responsible 
agent, and against the right of the victim, the crime 
committed is murder or unjustifiable homicide. 

Which supposes that there is a kind of homicide 
that is justifiable, in seeming contradiction of the 
general law of God and nature, which specifies no 
exception. But there is a question here less of 
exception than of distinction. The law is a general 
one, of vast comprehension. Is all killing prohibited? 
Evidently no. It is limited to human beings, in the 
first place ; to responsible agents, in the next ; and 
thirdly, it involves a question of injustice. What is 



HOMICIDE. 



forbidden is the voluntary and unjust killing of a 
human being. Having thus specified according to the 
rules of right reasoning, we find we have a considerable 
margin left for the taking of life that is justifiable. 
And the records of Divine revelation will approve the 
findings of right reason. 

We find God in the Old Law, while upholding 
His fifth precept, commanding capital punishment and 
sanctioning the slaughter of war; He not only 
approved the slaying of certain persons, I -.t there are 
instances of His giving authority to kill. By so doing 
He delegated His supreme right over life to His 
creatures. "Whoever sheds human blood, let his blood 
be shed." In the New Testament the officer of the law 
is called the minister of God and is said not without 
cause to carry the sword ; and the sword is the symbol 
of the power to inflict death. 

The presence of such laws as that of capital 
punshment, of war and of self-defense, in all the written 
codes of civilized peoples, as well as in the unwritten 
codes of savage tribes, can be accounted for only by 
a direct or indirect commission from the Deity. A 
legal tradition so universal and so constant is a natural 
law, and consequently a divine law. In a matter of 
such importance all mankind could not have erred ; 
if it has, it is perfectly safe to be with it in its 
error. 

These exceptions, if we may call them exceptions, 
suppose the victim to have forfeited his right to live, 
to have placed himself in a position of unjust 
aggression, which aggression gives to the party 
attacked the right to repel it, to protect his own life 
even at the cost of the life of the unjust aggressor. 
This is an individual privilege in only one instance, 
that of self-defence ; in all others it is invested in the 
body politic or society which alone can declare war 
and inflict death on a capital offender. 

Of course it may be said that in moral matters, 
like does not cure like, that to permit killing is a 



2l6 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



strange manner of discouraging the same. But this 
measure acts as a deterrent; it is not a cure for the 
offender, or rather it is, and a radical one ; it is 
intended to instil a salutar}^ dread into the hearts of 
those who may be inclined to pla}^ too freely with 
human Hfe. This is the only argument assassins 
understand; it is therefore the only one we can use 
against them. 



CHAPTER LXIX. 
IS SUICIDE A SIN? 

Most people no doubt remember how, a short 
time previous to his death, Col, Robert Ingersoll, the 
agnostic lecturer, gave out a thesis with the above 
title, offering a negative conclusion. Some discussion 
insued in public print ; the question was debated hotly, 
and whole columns of pros and cons were inflicted on 
the suffering public by the theologues who had taken 
the matter seriously. 

We recall, too, how, in the height of the discussion, 
a poor devil of an unfortunate was found in 
one of the parks of the Metropolis with an empty 
pistol in his clinched fist, a bullet in his head and in 
his pocket a copy of the thesis : Is suicide a sin ? 

To a Christian, this theorizing and speculation was 
laughable enough ; but when one was brought face to 
face with the reality of the thing, a grim humor was 
added to the situation. Comedy is dangerous that 
leads to tragedy. 

The witty part of the matter was this : Ingersoll 
spoke of sin. Now, what kind of an intelligible thing 
could sin be in the mind of a blasphemous agnostic? 



IS SUICIDE A SIN? 



217 



What meaning could it have for any man who 
professes not to know, or to care, who or what God 
is? 

If there is no Legislator, there is no Law ; if no 
Law, then no violation of the Law. If God does not 
exist, there can be no offending Him, Eliminate the 
notion of God, and there is no such thing as sin. Sin, 
therefore, had no meaning for IngersoU ; his thesis 
had no meaning, nothing he said had any meaning. 
Yet, people took him seriously ! And at least one poor 
wretch was willing to test the truth of the assertion 
and run his chances. 

Some people, less speculative, contend that the 
fact of suicide is sufficient evidence of irresponsibility, 
as no man in his right senses would take his own life. 
This position is both charitable and consoling; 
unfortunately, certain facts of premeditation and clear 
mindedness militate so strongly against such a general 
theory that one can easily afford to doubt its soundness. 
That this is true in many cases, perhaps in the majority 
of cases, all will admit; in all cases, few will admit it. 
However, the question here is one of principle, and not 
of fact. 

The prime evil at the bottom of all killing is that 
of injustice; but in self-destruction where the culprit 
and the victim are one and the same person, there 
can be no question of injustice. Akin to, and a 
substitute for, the law of justice is that of charity, by 
which we are bound to love ourselves and do ourselves 
no harm or injury. The saying "charity begins at 
home" means that we ourselves are the first objects of 
our charity. If therefore v/e must respect the life of 
our neighbor, the obligation is still greater to respect 
our own. 

Then there is the supreme law of justice that 
reposes in God. We should remember that God is the 
supreme and sole Master of life. Man has a lease 
of life, but it does not belong to him to destroy at his 
own will. He did not give it to himself ; and he cannot 



2l8 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



take it away. Destruction supposes an authority and 
dominion that does not belong to any man where Ufe 
is concerned. And he who assumes such a prerogative 
commits an act of unquestionable injustice against 
Him whose authority is usurped. 

By indirect killing we mean the placing of an act, 
good or at least morally indifferent, from which may 
result a benefit that is intended, but also a^n evil — death 
— which is not intended but simply suffered to occur. 
In this event there is no sin, provided there be suffi- 
cient reason for permitting said evil effect. The act 
may be an operation, the benefit intended, a cure ; the 
evil risked, death. The misery of ill health is a suffi- 
cient reason for risking the evil of death in the hope of 
regaining strength and health. To escape sure death, 
to escape from grave danger or ills, to preserve one's 
virtue, to save another's life, to assure a great public 
benefit, etc., these are reasons proportionate to the evil 
of risking life ; and in these and similar cases, if death 
results, it is indirect suicide, and is in nowise criminal. 

The same cannot be said of death that results from 
abuses or excesses of any kind, such as dissipation or 
debauchery; from risks that are taken in a spirit of 
bravado or with a view to winning fame or lucre. 
For a still better reason this cannot be said of those 
who undergo criminal operations : it is never permitted 
to do what is intrinsically evil that good may come 
therefrom. 

All this applies to self-mutilation as well as to 
self-destruction ; as parts of the whole, one's limbs 
should be the objects of one's charity, and God's law 
demands that we preserve them as well as the body 
itself. It is lawful to submit to the maiming process 
only when the utility of the whole body demands it; 
otherwise it is criminal. 

One word more. What about those who call upon, 
and desire death ? To desire evil is sinful. Yes, but 
death is a moral evil when its mode is contrary to the 
laws of God and of nature. Thus, with perfect 



IS SUICIDE A SIN? 



219 



acquiescence to order of Divine Providence, if one 
desire death in order to be at rest with God, that one 
desires a good and meritorious thing and with perfect 
regularity; it is less meritorious to desire death with 
the sole view of escaping the ills and troubles of life ; 
it w^ould even be difficult to convict one of mortal 
offending if he desired death for a slight and futile 
reason, if there be due respect for the will of God. 
The sin of such desires consists in rebellion against 
the divine Will and opposition to the providence of 
God; in such cases the sin is never anything but 
grievous. 



CHAPTER LXX. 
SELF-DEFENSE. 

The thought is a terrible one — and the act is 
desperate in itself — of a man, however justified his 
conduct may be, slaying with his own hand a fellow 
being and sending his soul, unprepared perhaps, before 
its Maker. But it is a still more desperate thing, 
because it strikes us nearer home, to yield up one's life 
into the hands of an agent of injustice. There is here 
an alternative of two very greait evils ; it is a question 
of two lives, his and mine ; I must slay or I must die 
without having done anything to forfeit my life. 

But the law of charity, founded in nature, makes 
my life more precious to me than his, for charity begins 
at home. Then, to save his life, I must give mine ; 
and he risks his to take mine ! I do not desire to kill 
my unjust aggressor, but I do intend, as I have a 
perfect right, to protect my own life. If he, without 



220 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



cause, places his existence as an obstacle to my enjoy- 
ment of life, then I shall remove that obstacle, and to 
do it, I shall kill. Again, a desperate remedy, but 
the situation is most terribly desperate. Being given 
law of my being, I can not help the inevitable result 
of conditions of v^^hich I am nowise responsible. The 
man who attacks my life places his own beyond the 
possibility of my saving it. 

This, of course, supposes a man using the full 
measure of his rights. But is he bound to do this, 
morally? Not if his charity for another be greater 
than that which he bears towards himself, if he go 
beyond the divine injunction to love his neigh- 
bor as himself and love him better than him- 
self; if he feel that he is better prepared to meet 
his God than the other, if he have no one dependent 
on him for maintenance and support. Even did he 
happen to be in the state of mxortal sin, there is every 
reason to believe that such charity as will sacrifice 
life for another, greater than which no man has, would 
wash away that sin and open the way of mercy ; while 
great indeed must be the necessity of the dependent 
ones to require absolutely the death of another. 

The aggression that justifies killing must be 
unjust. This would not be the case of a criminal being- 
brought to justice or resisting arrest. Justice cannot 
conflict with itself and can do nothing unjust in 
carrying out its own mandates. The culprit therefore 
has no grounds to stand upon for his defense. 

Neither is killing justifiable, if wounding or 
mutilation would effect the purpose. But here the 
code of morals allows much latitude on account of the 
difBculty of judging to a nicety the intentions of the 
aggressor, that is, whether he means to kill or not; 
and of so directing the protecting blow as to inflict 
just enough, and no more disability than the occasion 
requires. 

Virtue in woman is rightly considered a boon 
greater than life ; and for that matter, so is the state of 



SELF DEFENSE. 



221 



God's friendship in the soul of any creature. Then, 
here too applies the principle of self-defense. If I ma/y 
kill to save my life, I may for a better reason kill to 
save my soul and to avoid mortal offense. True, the 
loss of bodily integrity does not necessarily imply a 
staining of the soul; but human nature is such as to 
make the one an almost fatal consequence of the other. 
The person therefore who kills to escape unjust 
contamination acts within his or her rights and before 
God is justified in the doing. 

We would venture to say the same thing of a 
man who resorts to this extreme in order to protect 
his rightly gotten goods, on these two conditions, 
however: that there be some kind of proportion 
between the loss and the remedy he employs to protect 
himself against it; and that he have well grounded 
hope that the remedy will be effective, that it will 
prevent said loss, and not transform itself into revenge. 

And here a last remark is in order. The killing 
that is permitted to save, is not permitted to avenge 
loss sustained ; the law sanctions self-defense, but not 
vengeance. If a man, on the principle of self-defense, 
has the right to kill to save his brother, and fails to do 
so, his further right to kill ceases ; the object is past 
saving and vengeance is criminal. If a woman has 
been wronged, once the v/rong effected, there can be 
no lawful recourse to slaying, for what is lost is beyond 
redemption, and no reason for such action exists except 
revenge. In these cases killing is murder, pure and 
simple, and there is nothing under Heaven to justify it. 

Remembering the injunction to love our neighbor 
as ourself, we add that we have the same right to 
defend our neighbor's life as we have to defend our 
own, even to protect his or her innocence and virtue 
and possessions. A husband may defend the honor 
of his wife, which is his own, even though the wife 
be a party to the crime and consent to the defilement ; 
but the right is only to prevent, and ceases on the 
event of accomplishment, even at the incipient stage. 



CHAPTER LXXI. 



MURDER OFTEN SANCTIONED. 

All injury done to another in order to repair an 
insult is criminal, and if said injury result in death, 
it is murder. 

Here we consider an insult as an atttack on one's 
reputation or character, a charge or accusation, a 
slurring remark, etc., without reference to the truth 
or falsity thereof. It may be objected that whereas 
reputation, like chastity and considerable possessions, 
is often valued as high as life itself, the same right 
exists to defend it even at the cost of another's life. 
But it must be remembered that the loss of character 
sustained in consequence of an insult of this kind is 
something very ephemeral and unsubstantial ; and only 
to a mind abnormally sensitive can any proportion be 
perceived between the loss and the remedy. This is 
especially true when the attack is in words and goes 
no farther than words: for ''sticks and stones will 
break your bones, but names will never hurt you," as 
we used to say when we were boys. Then, words are 
such fleeting things that the harm is done, whatever 
harm there is, before any remedy can be brought to 
bear upon it; which fact leaves no room for self- 
defense. 

In such a case, the only redress that can be had 
is from the courts of justice, established to undo 
wrongs as far as the thing can be done. The power 
to do this belongs to the State alone, and is vested 
in no private individual. To assume the prerogative 
of privately doing oneself justice, when recourse can 
be had to the tribunals of justice, is to sin, and every 
act committed in this pursuit of justice is unlawful 
and criminal. 



MURDER OFTEN SANCTIONED. 



223 



This applies likewise to all the other cases of 
self-defense wherein life, virtue and wealth are con- 
cerned, if the harm is already done, or if legal 
measures can prevent the evil, or undo it. It may 
be that the justice dealt out by the tribunal, in case 
of injury being done to us, prove inferior to that 
which we might have obtained ourselves by private 
methods. But this is not a reason for one to take 
the law into one's own hands. Such loss is accidental 
and must be ascribed to the inevitable course of human 
things. 

Duelling is a form of murder and suicide com- 
bined, for which there can possibly be no justification. 
The code of honor that requires the reparation of 
an insult at the point of the sword or the muzzle of 
a pistol has no existence outside the befogged intel- 
ligence of godless men. The duel repairs nothing 
and aggravates the evil it seeks to remedy. The 
justice it appeals to is a creature dependent on skill 
and luck; such justice is not only blind, but crazy 
as well. 

That is why the Church anathematizes duelling. 
The duel she condemns is a hand-to-hand combat 
prearranged as to weapons, time and place, and it 
is immaterial whether it be to the death or only to 
the letting of first blood. She fulminates her major 
excommunication against duellists, even in the event 
of their failing to keep their agreement. Her sen- 
tence affects seconds and all those who advise or 
favor or abet^ and even those whose simple presence 
is an incentive and encouragement. She refuses 
Christian burial to the one who falls, unless before 
dying he shows certain dispositions of repentance. 

Prize fighting, however brutal and degrading, 
must not be put in the category of duelling. Its object 
is not to wipe out an insult, but to furnish sport and to 
reap the incidental profits. In normal conditions there 
is no danger to life or limb. Sharkey might stop with 
the point of his chin a blow that would send many 



224 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



another into kingdom come; but so long as Sharkey 
does the stopping the danger remains non-existent. If, 
however, hate instead of lucre bring the men together, 
that motive would be sufficient to make the game one 
of blood if not of death. 

Lynching, is another kind of murder, and a 
cowardly, brutal kind, at that. No crime, no abom- 
ination on the part of the victim, however great, can 
justify such an inhuman proceeding. It brands with 
the crime of wilful murder every man or woman who 
has a hand in it. To defend the theory of lynching 
is as bad as to carry it out in practice. And it is 
greatly to be feared that the Almighty will one day 
call this land to account for the outrageous perform- 
ances of unbridled license and heartless cruelty that 
occur so frequently in our midst. 

The only plea on which to ground a«i excuse for such 
exhibitions of brutality and disrespect for order and 
justice would be the inability of established government 
to mete out justice to the guilty; but this is not even 
the case, for government is defied and lawful authority 
capable and wilHng to punish is spurned; the culprit 
is taken from the hands of the law and delivered 
over to the vengeance of a mob. However popular 
the doctrine of Judge Lynch may be in certain sec- 
tions of the land, it is nevertheless reprobated by the 
law of God and stands condemned at the bar of His 
justice. 



CHAPTER LXXII. 



ON THE ETHICS OF WAR. 

In these days, since we have evolved into a fight- 
ing nation, our young men feel within them the in- 
stinct of battle, which, like Job's steed, "when it 
heareth the trumpet, saith : 'ha, ha' ; that smelleth the 
battle afar off, the encouraging of the captains, the 
shouting of the army." Military trappings are no 
longer looked upon as stage furniture, good only for 
Fourth-of-July parades and sham manoeuvers. War 
with us has become a stern reality, and promises to 
continue such, for people do not yield up willingly 
their independence, even to a world-power with a 
providential "destiny" to fulfil. And since war is 
slaughter, it might be apropos to remark on the 
morality of such killing as is done on the field of battle 
and of war in general. 

In every war there is a right side and a wrong 
side; sometimes, perhaps, more frequently, there is 
right and wrong on both sides, due to bungling di- 
plomacy and the blindness of prejudice. But in every 
case justice demands the triumph of one cause and 
the defeat of the other. To determine in any particu- 
lar case the side of right and justice is a very difficult 
matter. And perhaps it is just as well that it is so; 
for could this be done with truth and accuracy, fright- 
ful responsibilities would have to be placed on the 
shoulders of somebody; and we shrink instinctively 
from the thought of any one individual or body of 
individuals standing before God with the crime of war 
on his or their souls. 

Therefore it is that grave men are of the opinion 
that such a tremendous event as war is not wholly 



226 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



of man's making, but rather an act of God, like earth- 
quakes, volcanic eruptions and the like; which things 
He uses as flails to chastise His people, or to bring 
them to a sense of their own insignificance in His sight. 
Be this as it may, it is nevertheless true that a private 
individual is rarely, if ever, competent to judge rightly 
by himself of the morality of any given cause, until 
such time at least as history has probed the matter 
and brought every evidence to light. In case, there- 
fore, of doubt, every presumption should favor the 
cause of one's own country. If, in my private opinion, 
the cause of my country is doubtfully wrong, then 
that doubt should yield to the weight of higher 
authoritative opinion. Official or popular judgment 
will be authority for me ; on that authority I may form 
a strong probable opinion, at least; and this will 
assure the morality of my taking up my country's 
cause, even though it be doubtful from my personal 
point of view. If this cannot be done and one's con- 
science positively reprove such a cause, then that one 
cannot, until a contrary conviction is acquired, take 
any part therein. But he is in no wise bound to 
defend with arms the other side, for his convictions 
are subjective and general laws do not take these 
into account. 

Who are bound to serve? That depends on the 
quality of danger to which the commonwealth is ex- 
posed. First, the obligation is for those who can do 
so easily ; young men, strong, unmarried, with a taste 
for such adventure as war affords. The greater the 
general peril, the less private needs should be con- 
sidered. The situation may be such as to call forth 
every able-bodied man, irrespective of family neces- 
sities. To shirk this duty when it is plainly a duty 
— 2ii rare circumstance, indeed — is without doubt a sin. 

Obedience to orders is the alpha and omega of 
army disclipine; without it a cause is lost from the 
beginning. Numbers are nothing compared to order ; 
a mob is not a fighting machine; it is only a fair 



ON THE ETHICS OF WAR. 



227 



target. The issue of a battle, or even of a whole war, 
may depend on obedience to orders. Army men know 
this so well that death is not infrequently the penalty 
of disobedience. Consequently, a violation of dis- 
cipline is usually a serious offense ; it may easily be a 
mortal sin. 

War being slaughter, the soldier's business is to 
kill or rather to disable, as many of the enemy as pos- 
sible on the field of battle. This disabling process 
means, of course, and necessarily, the maiming unto 
death of many. Such killing is not only lawful, but 
obligatory. War, like the surgeon's knife, must often 
lop off much in order to save the whole. The best 
soldier is he who inflicts most damage on the enemy. 

But the desire and intention of the soldier should 
not be primarily to kill, but only to put the enemy 
beyond the possibility of doing further harm. Death 
will be the result of his efforts in many cases, and this 
he suffers to occur rather than desires and intends. 
He has no right to slay outside of battle or without 
the express command of a superior officer; if he does 
so, he is guilty of murder. Neither must there be 
hate behind the aim that singles out a foe for 
destruction ; the general hatred which he bestows on 
the opposing cause must respect the individual enemy. 

It is not lawful to wantonly torture or maim an 
enemy, whoever or whatever he may be, however great 
his crime. Not even the express command of a 
superior officer can justify such doings, because it is 
barbarity, pure and unmitigated. In war these things 
are morally just what they would be if they were 
perpetrated in the heart of peace and civilization by a 
gang of thugs. These are abominations that, not only 
disgrace the flag under which they are committed, but 
even cry to Heaven for vengeance, 



CHAPTER LXXIIL 



THE MASSACRE OF THE INNOCENTS. 

Herod, the Bloody, slew all under two. A modern 
Moloch, a creature of lust and blood, disguised often 
under the cloak of respectability, stalks through a 
Christian land denying the babe the right to be born 
at all, demanding that it be crushed as soon as con- 
ceived. There is murder and murder ; but this is the 
most heartless, cowardly and brutal on the catalogue 
of crime. 

It is bad enough to cut down an enemy, to shoot 
him in the back; but when it comes to slaying a vic- 
tim as helpless as a babe, incapable of entering a pro- 
test, innocent of all wrong save that of existing ; when 
even baptism is denied it, and thereby the sight of 
God for all eternity; when finally the victim is one's 
own flesh and blood, the language of hell alone is 
capable of qualifying such deeds. 

Do not say there is no injustice. Every innocent 
human being, at every stage of its existence, from 
the first to the last, born or unborn, has a natural and 
inalienable right to live, as long as nature's laws 
operate in its favor. Being innocent it cannot forfeit 
that right. God is no exceptor of persons ; a soul 
is a soul, whether it be the soul of a pontiff, a king 
or a sage, or the soul of the unborn babe of the last 
woman of the people. In every case, the right to live 
is exactly the same. 

The circumstances, regular or irregular, of its 
coming into life, not being of its own making, do not 
afifect the right in the least. It obeyed the law by 
which every man is created ; it could not disobey, for 



THE MASSACRE OF THE INNOCENTS. 229 

the law is fatal. Its presence therefore, cannot be 
morally obnoxious, a crime on its part. Whether 
its presence is a joy or a shame, that depends solely 
on the free act of others than itself ; and it is for them 
to enjoy the privilege or bear the disgrace and burden. 
That presence may occasion poverty, suffering, it may 
even endanger life; what if it does! Has a person 
in misfortune the right to strike down another who has 
had no part in making that misfortune ? 

Life does not begin at birth, but precedes it; 
prenatal life is truly life. That which is conceived, 
is; being, it lives as essentially as a full-grown man 
in the prime of life. Being the fruit of humanity it 
is human at every instant of its career; being human, 
it is a creature of God, has an immortal soul with the 
image of the Maker stamped thereon. And the veto 
of God, "Thou shalt not kill," protects that life, or it 
has no meaning at all. 

The psychological moment of incipient life, the 
instant marked by the infusion of soul into body, may 
furnish a problem of speculation for the savant; but 
even when certitude ends and doubt begins, the law 
of God fails not to protect. No man who doubts 
seriously that the act he is about to perform is a 
crime, and is free to act or not to act, is anything but 
a criminal, if he goes ahead notwithstanding and does 
the deed. If I send a bullet into a man's head 
doubting whether or not he be dead, I commit murder 
by that act, and it matters not at all in point of fact 
whether said person were really dead or not before I 
made sure. In the matter, therefore, which concerns 
us here, doubt will not make killing justifiable. The 
law is : when in doubt, do not act. 

Then, again, as far as guilt is concerned, it makes 
not a particle of difference whether results follow or 
not. Sin, you know, is an act of the will: the ex- 
terior deed completes, but does not make, the crime. 
If I do all in my power to effect a wrong and fail in 
the attempt through no fault of my own, I am just 



230 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



as guilty before God as if I perpetrated the crime 
in deed. It is more than a desire to commit sin, 
which is sinful ; it is a specific sin in itself, and in this 
matter, it is murder pure and simple. 

This applies with equal force to the agent who 
does the deed, to the principal who has it done or 
consents to its being done, to those who advise, en- 
courage, urge or co-operate in any way therein, as 
well as to those who having authority to prevent, 
neglect to use it. The stain of blood is on the soul of 
every person to whom any degree of responsibility 
or complicity can be attached. 

If every murderer in this enlightened Christian 
land of ours received the rope which is his or her due, 
according to the letter of the law, business would be 
brisk for quite a spell. It is a small town that has not 
its professional babe-slaughterer, who succeeds in 
evading the law even when he contrives to kill two at 
one time. He does not like to do it, but there is money 
in it, you know; and he pockets his unholy blood 
money without a squirm. Don't prosecute him ; if you 
db, he will make revelations that will startle the town. 

As for the unnatural mother, it is best to leave 
her to listen in the dead of night to the appealing voice 
of her murdered babes before the tribunal of God's 
infinite justice. Their blood calls for vengeance. 



CHAPTER LXXIV; 



ENMITY. 

Killing is not the only thing forbidden by the 
Fifth Commandment : thereby are prescribed all forms 
of enmity, of which killing is one, that attack either 
directly or indirectly, in thought or desire, as well as 
in deed, the life, limbs or health of the neighbor. The 
fifth precept protects the physical man; everything 
therefore that partakes of the nature of a design on 
the body of another is an offense against this 
commandment. All such offenses are not equally 
grievous, but each contains a malice of its own, which 
is prescribed under the head of killing. 

Enmity that takes the form of fighting, assault 
and battery, is clearly a breach of the law of God. 
It is lawful to wound, maim and otherwise disable an 
assailant, on the principle of self-defense, when there 
is no other means of protecting oneself against attack. 
But outside this contingency, such conduct is ruffianism 
before man, and sin before God. The State alone has 
the right to inflict penalties and avenge wrongs ; to 
turn this right over to every individual would be 
destructive of society. If this sort of a thing is 
unlawful and criminal when there might be some kind 
of an excuse for it on the ground of injury received, 
the malice thereof is aggravated considerably by the 
fact of there being no excuse at all, or only imaginary 
ones. 

There is another form of enmity or hatred that 
runs not to blows but to words. Herein is evil, not 
because of any bodily injury wrought, of which there 
is none, but because of the diabolical spirit that 
manifests itself, a spirit reproved by God and which. 



232 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



in given circumstances, is ready to resort to physical 
injury and even to the letting of blood. There can 
be no doubt that hatred in itself is forbidden by this 
commandment, for ''whosoever hateth his brother is a 
murderer," according to St. John. It matters httle, 
therefore, whether such hatred be in deeds or in words ; 
the malice is there and the sin is consummated. A 
person, too weak to do an enemy bodily harm, may 
often use his or her tongue to better effect than another 
could his fists, and the verbal outrage thus committed 
may be worse than a physical one. 

It is not even necessary that the spirit of enmity 
show itself at all on the outside for the incurring of 
such guilt as attends the violation of this 
commandment. It is sufficient that it possess the soul>. 
and go no farther than a desire to do harm. This is 
the spirit of revenge, and it is none the less sinful in 
the eyes of God because it lacks the complement of 
exterior acts. It is immoral to nourish a grudge 
against a fellow-man. Such a spirit only awaits an 
occasion to deal a blow, and, when thait occasion shows 
itself, will be ready, willing and anxious to strike. The 
Lord refuses the gifts and offerings and prayers of 
such people as these ; they are told to go and become 
reconciled with their brother and lay low the spirit 
that holds them; then, and only then, will 
their offerings be acceptable. 

Even less than this suffices to constitute a breach 
of the Fifth Commandment. It is the quality of such 
passions as envy and jealousy to sometimes be content 
with the mere thought of injury done to their object, 
without* even going so far as to desire to work the 
evil themselves. These passions are often held in 
check for a time; but, in the event of misfortune 
befalling the hated rival, there follows a sense of 
complacency and satisfaction which, if entertained, has 
all the malice of mortal sin. If, on the contrary, the 
prosperity of another inspire us with a feeling of 
regret and sadness, which is deliberately countenanced 



ENMITY. 



and consented to^ there can be no doubt as to the 
grievous maHce of such a failing. 

Finally recklessness may be the cause of our 
harming another. It is a sound principle of morals 
that one is responsible for his acts in the measure of 
his foreseeing, and consenting to, the results and 
consequences. But there is still another sound principle 
according to which every man is accountable, at least 
indirectly, for the evil consequences of his actions, 
even though they be unforeseen and involuntary, in the 
measure of the want of ordinary human prudence 
shown in his conduct. A man with a loaded revolver 
in his hand may not have any design on the lives of 
his neighbors ; but if he blazes away right and left, 
and happens to fill this or that one with lead, he is 
guilty, if he is in his right mind; and a sin, a mortal 
sin, is still a sin, even if it is committed indirectly. 
Negligence is often culpable, and ignorance frequently 
a sin. 

Naturally, just as the soul is superior to the body, 
so evil example, scandal, the killing of the soul of 
another is a crime of a far greater enormity than the 
working of injury unto the body. Scandal comes 
properly under the head of murder; but it is less blood 
than lust that furnishes it with working material. It 
will therefore be treated in its place and time. 



CHAPTER LXXV. 

OUR ENEMIES. 

What is an enemy? A personal, an individual 
enemy is he who has done us a personal injury. The 
enemy, in a general or collective sense, are they — a 
people, a class or party — who are opposed to our 
interests, whose presence, doings or sayings are 



234 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



obnoxious to us for many natural reasons. Concerning 
these latter, it might be said that it is natural, often- 
times necessary and proper, to oppose them by all 
legitimate means. This opposition, however lawful, is 
scarcely ever compatible with any high degree of 
charity or affection. But whatever of aversion, 
antipathy or even hatred is thereby engendered, it is 
not of a personal nature; it does not attain the 
individual, but embraces a category of beings as a 
whole, who become identified with the cause they 
sustain and thereby fall under the common enmity. 
The law that binds us unto love of our enemy 
operates only in favor of the units, and not of the 
group as a group. 

Hatred, aversion, antipathy, such as divides 
peoples, races and communities, is one, though not the 
highest, characteristic of patriotism ; it may be called 
the defect of a quality. When a man is whole-souled 
in a cause, he will brook with difficulty any system of 
ideas opposed to, and destructive of, his own. Anxious 
for the triumph of what he believes the cause of right 
and justice, he will rejoice over the discomfiture of his 
rivals and the defeat of their cause. Wars leave behind 
an inheritance of hatred; persecution makes wounds 
that take a long time to heal. The descendants of the 
defeated, conquered or persecuted will look upon the 
generations of their fathers' foes as typifying 
oppression, tyranny and injustice, will wish them all 
manner of evil and gloat over their downfall. Such 
feelings die hard. They spring from convictions. The 
wounds made by injustice, fancied or real, will smart ; 
and just as naturally will men retain in their hearts 
aversion for all that which, for them, stands for such 
injustice. This is criminal only when it fails to respect 
the individual and become personal hate. 

Him who has done us a personal injury we must 
forgive. Pardon drives hatred out of the heart. Love 
of God is incompatible with personal enmity ; therefore 
such enmity must be quelched. He who says he loves 



OUR ENEMIES. 



God and hates his brother is a liar^ according to divine 
testimony. What takes the place of this hate? Love, 
a love that is called common love, to distinguish it 
from that special sort of affection that we have for 
friends. This is a general kind of love that embraces 
all men, and excludes none individually. It forbids 
all uncharity towards a man as a unit, and it supposes 
a disposition of the soul that would not refuse to give 
a full measure of love and assistance, if necessity 
required it. This sort of love leaves no room for 
hatred of a personal nature in the heart. 

Is it enough to forgive sincerely from the heart? 
It is not enough; we must manifest our forgiveness, 
and this for three good reasons : first, in order to secure 
us against self-illusion and to test the sincerity of our 
dispositions ; secondly, in order to put an end to discord 
by showing the other party that we hold no grudge; 
lastly, in order to remove whatever scandal may have 
been given by our breach of friendship. The disorder 
of enmity can be thoroughly cured and healed only by 
an open renewal of the ties of friendship; and this is 
done by the offering and acknowledgment of the signs 
of friendship. 

The signs of friendship are of two sorts, the one 
common, the other special. Common tokens of friend- 
ship are those signs which are current among people 
of the same condition of life; such as saluting, 
answering a question, dealing in business affairs, etc. 
These are commonly regarded as sufficient to take 
away any reasonable suspicion of hatred, although, in 
matter of fact, the inference may be false. But the 
refusal to give such tokens of pardon usually argues 
the presence of an uncharitable feeling that is sinful ; 
it is nearly always evidence of an unforgiving spirit. 
There are certain cases wherein the offense received 
being of a peculiar nature, justifies one in deferring 
such evidence of forgiveness ; but these cases are rare. 

If we are obliged to show by unmistakable signs 
that we forg-ive a wrong that has been done, we are 



236 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



in nowise bound to make a particular friend of the 
person who has been guilty of the wrong. We need 
not go out of our way to meet him, receive or visit 
him or treat him as a long lost brother. He would 
not expect it, and we fulfil our obligations toward him 
by the ordinary civilities we show him in the business 
of life. 

If we have offended, we must take the first step 
toward reconciliation and apologize; that is the only 
way we have of repairing the injury done, and to this 
we are held in conscience. If there is equal blame on 
both sides, then both are bound to the same duty of 
offering an apology. To refuse such advances on the 
part of one who has wronged us is to commit an offense 
that might very easily be grievous. 

All this, of course, is apart from the question of 
indemnification in case of real damage being sustained. 
We may condone an offense and at the same time 
require that the loss suffered be repaired. And in case 
the delinquent refuse to settle amicably, we are justified 
in pursuing him before the courts. Justice is not 
necessarily opposed to charity. 



CHAPTER LXXVI. 
IMMORALITY. 

The natural order of things brings us to a 
consideration of the Sixth Commandment, and at the 
same time, of the Ninth, as treating of the same matter 
— a matter so highly immoral as to deserve the specific 
appellation of immorality. 

People, as a rule, are tolerably well informed on 
this subject. It is a knowledge acquired by instinct, 
the depraved instinct of our fallen nature, and supple- 



IMMORALITY. 



merited by the experiences weaned from the dail/ 
sayings and doings of common life. Finally, that sort 
of journalism known as the ''yellow," and literature 
called pornographic, serve to round off this education 
and give it the finishing touches. 

But, on the other hand, if one considers the 
innocent, the young and inexperienced, who are not 
a few; and likewise the morbidly curious of sensual 
tendencies, who are many, this matter must appear as 
a high explosive, capable of doing any amount of 
damage, if not handled with the utmost care and 
caution. 

Much, therefore, must be left unsaid, or half-said ; 
suggestion and insinuation must be trusted to go far 
enough, in order that, while the knowing understand, 
the ignorant may be secure in the bliss of their 
ignorance and be not prematurely informed. 

They, for whom such language is insufficient, 
know where to go for fuller information. Patrents 
are the natural teachers ; the boy's father and the girl's 
mother know what to say, how and when to say it; 
or at least should know. And if parents were only 
more careful, in their own way, to acquaint their 
children with certain facts when the time comes for it, 
much evil would be avoided, both moral and physical. 

But there are secrets too sacred even for parents' 
ears, that are confided only to God, through His 
appointed minister. Catholics know this man is the 
confessor, and the place for such information and 
counsel, the holy tribunal of penance. These two 
channels of knowledge are safe; the same cannot be 
said of others. 

As a preliminary, we would remark that sins, of 
the sort here in question as well as all kinds of sin, 
are not limited to deeds. Exterior acts consummate 
the malice of evil, but they do not constitute such 
malice ; evil is generated in the heart. One who desires 
to do wrong offends God as effectively as another who 
does the wrong in deed. Not only that, but he who 



238 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



makes evil the food of his mind and ponders 
complacently on the seductive beauty of vice is no less 
guilty than he w^ho goes beyond theory into practice. 
This is something we frequently forget, or would fain 
forget, the greed of passion blinding us more or less 
voluntarily to the real moral value of our acts. 

As a consequence of this self-illusion maoy a 
one finds himself far beyond his depth in the sea of 
immorality before he fully realizes his position. It is 
small beginnings that lead to lasting results; it is by 
repeated acts that habits are formed ; and evil grows on 
us faster than most of us are willing to acknowledge. 
All manner of good and evil originates in thought; 
and that is where the little monster of uncleanness 
must be strangled before it is full-grown, if we would 
be free from its unspeakable thralldom. 

Again, this is a matter the malice and evil of 
which very, very rarely, if ever, escapes us. He who 
commits a sin of impurity and says he did not know 
it was wrong, lies deliberately, or else he is not in his 
right frame of mind. The Maker has left in our souls 
enough of natural virtue and grace to enable us to 
distinguish right and wrong, clean and unclean ; even 
the child with no definite knowledge of the matter, 
meeting it for the first time, instinctively blushes and 
recoils from the moral hideousness of its aspect. 
Conscience here speaks in no uncertain accents; he 
alone does not hear who does not wish to hear. 

Catholic theologians are even more rigid 
concerning the matter itself, prescinding altogether 
from our perception of it. They say that here no levity 
of matter is allowed, that is to say, every violation, 
however slight, of either of these two commandments, 
is a sin. You cannot even touch this pitch of moral 
defilement without being yourself defiled. It is useless 
therefore to argue the matter and enter a plea of 
triviality and inconsequence; nothing is trivial that is 
of a nature to offend God and damn a soul. 

Weakness has the same value as an excuse as it 



IMMORALITY. 



has elsewhere in moral matters. Few sins are of pure 
malice; weakness is responsible for the damnation of 
all, or nearly all, the lost. That very weakness is the 
sin, for virtue is strength. To make this plea therefore 
is to make no plea at all, for we are all weak, 
desperately weak, especially against the demon of the 
flesh, and we become weaker by yielding. And we 
are responsible for the degree of moral debility under 
which we labor just as we are for the degree of guilt 
we have incurred. 

Finally, as God, is no exceptor of persons. He 
does not distinguish between souls, and sex makes 
no difference with Him. In this His judgment differs 
from that of the world which absolves the man and 
condemns the woman. There is no evident reason why 
the violation of a. divine precept should be less criminal 
in one human creature than in another. And if the 
reprobation of society does not follow both equally, the 
wrath of God does, and He will render unto every 
one according to his and her works. 



CHAPTER LXXVn. 

THE SINK OF INIQUITY. 

The malice of lust consists in the abuse of a 
natural, a quasi-divine faculty, which is prostituted to 
ignoble purposes foreign to the ends by the Creator 
established. The lines along which this faculty may be 
legitimately exercised, are laid down by natural and 
divine laws, destined to preserve God's rights, to 
maintain order in society and to protect man against 
himself. The laws result in the foundattion of a state, 
called matrimony, within which the exercise of this 
human prerogative, delegated to man by the Creator, 



240 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



receives the sanction of divine authority, and becomes 
invested with a sacred character, as sacred as its abuse 
is abominable and odious. 

To disregard and ignore this condition of things 
and to seek satisfaction for one's passions outside the 
domain of lawful wedlock, is to revolt against this 
order of creative wisdom and to violate the letter of 
the law. But the intrinsic malice of the evil appears 
in the nature of this violation. This abuse touches life ; 
not life in its being, but in its source, in the principle 
that makes all vitality possible, which is still more 
serious. Immorality is therefore a moral poisoning of 
the wells of life. It profanes and desecrates a faculty 
and prerogative so sacred that it is likened to the 
almighty power of the Creator. 

A manifold malice may attach to a single act in 
violation of the law of moral purity. The burden of a 
vow in either party incurring guilt, whether that vow 
be matrimonial or religious, is a circumstance that adds 
injustice or sacrilege to the crime, according to the 
nature of that vow ; and the double guilt is on both 
parties. If the vow exists in one and the other 
delinquent, then the offense is still further multiplied 
and the guilt aggravated. Blood-relationship adds a 
specific malice of its own, slight or grievous according 
to the intimacy of said relationship. Fornication, 
adultery, sacrilege and incest — these, to give to things 
their proper names, are terms that specify various 
degrees of malice and guilt in this matter ; and although 
they do not sound well or look well in print, they have 
a meaning which sensible folks should not ignore. 

A lapse from virtue is bad; the habit or vice, 
voluntarily entertained, is infinitely worse. If the one 
argues weakness, even culpable, the other betrays a 
studied contempt for God and the law, an utter 
perversion of the moral sense that does not even esteem 
virtue in itself; an appalling thralldom of the spirit 
to the flesh, an appetite that is all ungodly, a gluttony 
that is bestial. Very often it supposes a victim held 



THE SINK OF INIQUITY. 



241 



fast in the clutches of unfeeHng hoggishness, fascinated 
or subjugated, made to serve, while serviceable; and 
then cast off without a shred of respectabiHty for 
another. It is an ordinary occurrence for one of these 
victims to swallow a deadly potion on being shown 
her folly and left to its consequences ; and the human 
ogre rides triumphantly home in his red automobile. 

But the positions may be reversed ; the victim may 
play the role of seductress, and displaying charms that 
excite the passions, ensnare the youth whose feet are 
not guided by the lamp of experience, wisdom and 
religion. This is the human spider, soulless and 
shameless, using splendid gifts of God to form a web 
with which to inveigle and entrap a too willing prey. 
And the dead flies, who will count them ! 

The climax of infamy is reached when this sort 
of a thing is made, not a pastime, but a business, when 
virtue is put on the market with its fixed value attached 
and bartered for a price. There is no outrage on 
human feeling greater than this. We are all born of 
woman; and the sight of womanhood thus degraded 
and profaned would give us more of a shock if it were 
less common. The curse of God is on such wretches 
as ply this unnatural trade and live by infamy ; not only 
on them, but on those also who make such traffic 
possible and lucrative. Considering all things, more 
guilty the latter than the former, perhaps. Active 
co-operation in evil makes one a joint partner in guilt; 
to encourage infamy is not only to sin, but also to 
share all the odium thereof ; while he who contributes 
to the perpetuation of an iniquity of this nature is, in 
a sense, worse than the unfortunates themselves. 

The civil law which seeks to eliminate the social 
evil of prostitution by enactment and process, gives 
rise, by enactment and process, to another evil almost 
as widespread. Divorce is a creature of the law, and 
divorce opens the door to concubinage, legalized if you 
will, but concubinage just the same. The marriage tie 
is intact after as well as before the decree of divorce; 



242 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



no human power can break that bond. The permission 
therefore to re-marry is permission to Uve in adultery, 
and that permission is, of its very nature, null and 
void. They who avail themselves of such a permis- 
sion and live in sin, may count on the protection of 
the law, but the law will not protect them against the 
wrath of the Almighty who condemns their immoral 
living. 



CHAPTER LXXVIII. 

WHEREIN NATURE IS OPPOSED. 

Certain excesses, such as we have already alluded 
to, however base and abominable in themselves and 
their effects, have nevertheless this to their credit that, 
while violating the positive law of God, they respect 
at least the fundamental laws of nature, according to 
which the universe is constructed and ordered. To 
satisfy one's depraved appetites along forbidden but 
natural lines, is certainly criminal; but an unnatural 
and beastly instinct is sometimes not satisfied with such 
abuse and excess ; the passion becomes so blinded as 
to ignore the difference of sex, runs even lower, to the 
inferior order of brutes. This is the very acme of 
ungodliness. 

There are laws on the statute books against 
abominations of this sort ; and be it said to the shame 
of a Christian community, said laws find an only too 
frequent application. Severe as are the penalties, they 
are less an adequate punishment than a public 
expression of the common horror inspired by the very 
mention of crimes they are destined to chastise. To 
attain this depth of infamy is at one and the same 
time to sin and to receive the penalty of sin. Here 



WHEREIN NATURE IS OPPOSED. 243 

culminates repeated violence to the moral law. When 
one is sated with ordinary lusts and is bent on sweeping 
the whole gamut of mundane experiences and excita- 
tions, that one invariably descends to the unnatural 
and extraordinary, and lives a life of protest against 
nature. 

St. Paul confirms this. According to him, God, 
in punishment for sin delivers over people to shameful 
affections, to a reprobate sense; he suffers them to be 
a hell unto themselves. And nature seldom fails to 
avenge herself for the outrages suffered. She uses the 
flail of disease and remorse, of misery and disgust, and 
she scourges the culprit to the verge of the grave, often 
to the yawning pit of hell. 

People shudder at the very thought of such 
unmentionable things: but there are circles in society 
in which such sanctimonious shuddering is a mighty 
thin veil of hypocrisy. Infinitely more common, and 
little, if any, less unnatural and abominable are the 
crimes that are killing off the old stock that once 
possessed the land and making the country dependent 
for increase of population on the floods of immigration. 
The old Puritan families are almost extinct ; Boston is 
more Irish than Dublin. The phenomenon is so strik- 
ing here that it is called New Englandism. Why are 
there so few large families outside the Irish and 
Canadian elements? Why are there seen so few 
children in the fashionable districts of our large cities ? 
Why this blast of sterility with which the land is 
cursed? Look behind the phenomenon, and you will 
find the cause ; and the finding will make you shudder. 
And if only those shudder who are free from stain, the 
shuddering will be scarcely audible. Onan and Malthus 
as household gods are worse than the gods of Rome. 

Meanwhile, the unit deteriorates alongside the 
family, being given over to a reprobat- sense that is 
centered in self, that furnishes, against all law, its own 
satisfactions, and reaps, in all justice, its inevitable 
harvest of woe. To what extent this vice is common it 



244 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



would serve no purpose to examine; students of 
criminology have more than once made known their 
views on the matter. The character of its malice, both 
moral and physical, needs no comment; nature is 
outraged. But it has this among its several features ; 
the thralldom to which it subjects its victim has 
nothing outside itself to which it may be compared. 
Man's self is his own greatest tyrant; there are no 
tortures so exquisite as those we provide for ourselves. 
While therefore we reprove the culprit, we commiserate 
with the unfortunate victim, and esteem that there is 
none more worthy of sympathy, conditioned, of course, 
on a state of mind and soul on his part that seeks 
relief and freedom ; otherwise, it were pity wasted. 

We have done with this infernal category of sin 
and filth. Yet we would remark right here that for 
the most part, as far as they are general and common, 
these excesses are the result of one ca.use; and that 
cause is everyday systematic Godlessness such as our 
public schools are largely responsible for. This 
system is responsible for a want of vital Christianity, 
of a lack of faith and religion that penetrates the 
human fibre and makes God and morality a factor in 
every deed. Deprived of this, youth has nothing to fall 
back on when the hour of temptation comes ; and when 
he falls, nothing to keep him from the bottom of the 
pit. 

It is impossible to put this argument in detail 
before the Christian and Catholic parent. If the parent 
does not see it, it is because that parent is deficient 
in the most essential quality of a parent. Nothing 
but the atmosphere of a religious school can save our 
youth from being victims of that maelstrom of 
impurity that sweeps the land. And that alone, with 
the rigid principles of morality there inculcated, can 
save the parents of to-morrow from the blight and 
curse of New Englandism. 



CHAPTER LXXIX. 



HEARTS. 

The heart, the seat of the affections, is, after the 
mind whose authority and direction it is made to obey, 
man's noblest faculty; but it may, in the event of its 
contemning reason's dictates, become the source and 
fountain-head of inordinate lust and an instrument of 
much moral disaster and ruin. When the intelligence 
becomes powerless to command and to say what and 
when and how the affections shall disport themselves, 
then man becomes a slave to his heart and is led like 
an ass by the nose hither and thither ; and when nature 
thus runs unrestrained and wild, it makes for the 
mudholes of lust wherein to wallow and besot itself. 

The heart is made to love what is good ; now, good 
is real or apparent. Love is blind, and needs reason to 
discern for it what is good and what is not, rea^son to 
direct its affections into their legitimate channels. But 
the heart may refuse to be thus controlled, swayed by 
the whisperings of ignorant pride and conceit; or it 
may be unable to receive the impulse of the reason on 
account of the unhealthy fumes that arise from a too 
exuberant animal nature unchastened by self-denial. 
Then it is that, free to act as it lists, it accepts 
indiscriminately everything with an appearance 
of good, in which gets mixed up much of that which 
appeals to the inferior appetites. And in the end it 
gets lost. 

Again, the heart is a power for good or evil; it 
may be likened to a magazine, holding within its 
throbbing sides an explosive deposit of untold energy 
and puissance, capable of all things within the range 
of the human. While it may lift man to the very 



246 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



pinnacle of goodness, it may also sink him to the lowest 
level of infamy. Only, in one caise, it is spiritualized 
love, in the other, it is carnal ; in one case it obeys the 
spirit, in the other, the flesh ; in one case its true name 
is charity, in the other, it is animal, sexual instinct, 
and it is only improperly called love. For God is love. 
Love therefore is pure. That which is not pure is not 
love. 

People who trifle with the affectioiis usually come 
to woe sooner or later, sooner rather than later ; affairs 
of the heart are always morally malodorous affairs. 
Frequently there is evil on one side at least, in intention, 
from the start. The devil's game is to play on the 
chaste attachment, and in an unguarded moment, to 
swing it around to his point. If the victim does not 
balk at the first shock and surprise, the game is won ; 
for long experience has made him confident of being 
able to make the counterfeit look like the real ; and it 
requires, as a general rule, little argument to make us 
look at our faults in their best light. 

Many a pure love has degenerated and many a 
virtue fallen, why ? because people forget who and what 
they are, forget they are human, forget they are 
creatures of flesh and blood, predisposed to sin, 
saturated with concupiscence and naturally frail as a 
reed against the seductions of the wily one. They 
forget this, and act as though theirs were an angelic, 
instead of a human, nature. They imagine themselves 
proof against that which counts such victims as David 
and Solomon, which would cause the fall of a Father 
of the desert, or even of an angel from heaven 
encumbered with the burden we carry, if he despised 
the claims of ordinary common sense. 

And this forgetfulness on their part, let it be 
remembered, is wholly voluntary and culpable, at least 
in its cause. They may not have been attentive at the 
precise moment that the flames of passion reached the 
mine of their affections ; but they were well aware that 
things would come inevitably to such a pass. And 



HEARTS. 



247 



when the mine went up, as it was natural, what wonder 
if disaster followed ! Who is to blame but themselves ? 
People do not play with matches around a powder 
magazine ; and if they do, very little consolation comes 
with the knowledge of their folly when they are being 
picked up in sections from out of the ruins. 

Of course there are easier victims than these^ such 
as would not recognize true inter-sexual love if they 
saw it through a magnifying glass ; everything of the 
nature of a fancy or whim, of a sensation or emotion^ 
with them is love. Love-sick maidens are usually 
soft-brained, and their languorous swains, lascivious. 
The latter pose as "killers the former wear their 
heart on their sleeve, and are convinced that every 
second man they meet who treats them gallantly is 
smitten with their charms and is passionately in love 
with them. 

Some go in for excitement and novelty, to break 
the monotony of virtuous restraint. They are anxious 
for a little adventure and romance. A good thing, 
too, to have these exploits to narrate to their friends. 
But they do not tell all to their friends ; they would 
be ashamed to. If said friends are wise they can 
supply the deficiencies. And when it is all over, it 
is the same old story of the man that did not know 
the gun was loaded. 

They therefore who would remain pure must of 
all necessity keep custody over their heart's a^flfections, 
make right reason and faith their guide and make 
the will force obedience thereto. If wrong attachments 
are formed, then there is nothing to do but to eradicate 
them, to cut, tear and crush; they must be destroyed 
at any cost. A pennyweight of prudence might have 
prevented the evil; it will now take mortification m 
large and repeated doses to undo it. In this alone is 
there salvation. 



CHAPTER LXXX, 



OCCASIONS. 

Occasions of sin are persons, places or things 
that may easily lead us into sin : this definition of the 
little catechism is simple and clear and requires no 
comment. It is not necessary that said places or 
things, or even said persons, be evil in themselves ; 
it is sufficient that contact with, or proximity to, them 
induce one to commit an evil. It may happen, and 
sometimes does, that a person without any evil design 
whatever become an occa-sion of sin for another. The 
blame therefore does not necessarily lie with objects, 
but rather with the subject. 

Occasions are of two kinds : the remote or far 
and the proximate or near; they differ in the degree 
of facility with which they furnish temptation, and 
in the quality and nature of such temptation. In the 
former, the danger of falling is less, in the latter it is 
more, probable. In theory, it is impossible to draw 
the line and say just when an occasion ceases to be 
proximate and becomes remote; but in the concrete 
the thing is easy enough. If I have a well-grounded 
fear, a fear made prudent by experience, that in this 
or that conjuncture I shall sin, then it is a near 
occasion for me. If, however, I can feel with 
knowledge and conviction that I am strong enough to 
overcome the inevitable temptation arising from this 
other conjunction of circumstances, the occasion is 
only remote. 

Thus, since danger in moral matters is nearly 
always relative ; what is a remote occasion for one may 
be a proximate occasion for another. Proneness to evil 



OCCASIONS. 



249 



is not the same in us all, for we have not all the same 
temperament and the same virtue. Two individuals 
may assist at a ball or a dance or a pla}^ the one secure 
from sin, immune against temptation, the other a 
manifold victim of his or her folly. The dance or 
spectacle may not be bad in itself, it is not bad in fact 
for one, it is positively evil for the other and a near 
occasion of sin. 

Remote occasions cannot always be avoided, they 
are so numerous and frequent; besides the evil they 
contain is a purely imaginative, and therefore 
negligible, quantity. There may be guilt however in 
seeking such occasions and without reason exposing 
ourselves to their possible dangers; temerity is 
culpable ; he that loves danger shall perish. 

With the other kind, it is difrerent. The simple 
fact of embracing a proximate occasion of sin is a 
grievous fault, even in the event of our accidentally 
not succumbing to the temptation to which we are 
exposed. There is an evil in such rashness independent 
of its consequences. He therefore who persists in 
visiting a place where there is every facility for sinning 
and where he has frequently sinned, does a deed of 
crime by going there ; and whatever afterwards occurs, 
or does not occur, affects that crime not in the least. 
The same is true of reading certain books, novels and 
love-stories, for people of a certain spiritual 
complexion. The same is true of company-keeping, 
street-walking, familiarity and loose conversation. 
Nor can anything different be said of such liberties, 
consented to or merely tolerated, as embracing and 
kissing, amorous effusions and all perilous amusements 
of this nature. When experience shows these things 
to be fraught with danger, then they become sinful in 
themselves, and can be indulged in only in contempt 
of the law of God and to our own serious spiritual 
detriment. 

But suppose I cannot avoid the occasion of sin, 
cannot remove it^ what then? 



250 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



If it is a clear case of proximate occasion of sin, 
and all mea-ns fail to change it, then the supposition 
of impossibility is a ridiculous one. It is paramount 
to asserting that sin and offense of God is sometimes 
necessary ; and to talk thus is to talk nonsense. Sin is 
a deliberate act of a free will ; mention necessity in the 
same breath, and you destroy the notion of sin. There 
can never be an impossibility of avoiding sin; 
consequently, there can never be an impossibility of 
avoiding a near occasion of sin. 

It may be hard, very difficult ; but that is another 
thing. But, as we have already said, the difficulty is 
rather within than without us, it arises from a lack of 
will power. But hard or easy, these occasions must 
nevertheless be removed. Let the sui¥ering entailed 
be what it may, the eye must be plucked out, the arm 
must be lopped off, to use the Saviour's figurative 
language, if in no other way the soul can be savfed 
from sin. Better to leave your father's house, better 
to give up your very life, than to damn your soul for all 
eternity. But extremes are rarely called for; small 
sacrifices often cost more than great ones. A good 
dose of ordinary, everyday mortification and penance 
goes a long way toward producing the necessary effect. 
An ounce of self-denial will work miracles in a 
sluggard, cowardly soul. 

It would be well on occasion to remember this, 
especially when one in such a state is thinking seriously 
of going to confession : if he is not prepared to make 
the required effort, then he had better stay away until 
such a time as he is willing. For if he states his case 
correctly, he will not receive absolution; if his avowal 
is not according to fact, his confession is void, perhaps 
sacrilegious. Have done with sin before you can 
expect to kave your sins forgiven. 



CHAPTER LXXXI. 
SCANDAL. 

On only rare occasions do people who follow 
the bent of their unbridled passions bethink them- 
selves of the double guilt that frequently attaches 
to their sins. Seemingly satisfied with the evil they 
have wrought unto their own souls, they choose to 
ignore the wrong they may have done unto others 
as a consequence of their sinful doings. They believe 
in the principle that every soul is personally respon- 
sible for its own damnation : which is true ; but they 
forget that many elements may enter as causes into 
such a calamity. We are in nowise isolated beings 
in this world ; our lives may, and do, affect the lives 
of others, and influence them sometimes to an extra- 
ordinary extent. We shall have, each of us, to answer 
one day for results of such influence ; there is no man 
but is, in this sense, his brother's guardian. 

There are^ who deny this, like Cain. Yet we 
know that Jesus Christ spoke clearly His mind in 
regard to scandal, and the emphasis He lays on His 
anathemas leaves no room to doubt of His judgment 
on the subject. Scandal, in fact, is murder; not 
corporal murder, which is a vengeance-crying abom- 
ination, but spiritual murder, heinous over the other 
in the same measure as the soul's value transcends 
that of the body. Kill the body, and the soul may 
live and be saved ; kill the soul and it is lost eternally. 

Properly speaking, scandal is any word or deed, 
evil or even with an appearance of evil, of a nature 
to furnish an occasion of spiritual downfall, to lead 
another into sin. It does not even matter whether 



252 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



the results be intended or merely suffered to occur; 
it does not even matter if no results follow at all. It 
is sufficient that the stumbling-block of scandal be 
placed in the way of another to his spiritual peril, 
and designed by nature to make him fall ; on him 
who placed it, is the guilt of scandal. 

The act of scandal consists in making sin easier 
to commit — as though it were not already easy enough 
to sin — for another. Natural grace, of which we are 
not totally bereft, raises certain barriers to protect 
and defend the weak and feeble. Conspicuous among 
these are ignorance and shame ; evil sometimes offers 
difficulties, the ones physical, the others spiritual, such 
as innate delicacy, sense of dignity, timidity, instinc- 
tive repugnance for filth, human respect, dread of 
consequences, etc. These stand on guard before the 
soul to repel the first advances of the tempter which 
are the most dangerous ; the Devil seldom unmasks 
his heavy batteries until the advance-posts of the soul 
are taken. It is the business of scandal to break down 
these barriers, and for scandal this work is as easy as 
it is nefarious. For curiosity is a hungering appe- 
tite, virtue is often protected with a very thin veil, 
and vice can be made to lose its hideousness and 
assume charms, to untried virtue, irresistible. There 
is nothing doing for His Satanic Majesty while scandal 
is in the field ; he looks on and smiles. 

There may be some truth in the Darwinian theory 
after all, if we judge from the imitative propensities 
of the species, probably an inherited trait of our com- 
mon ancestor, the monkey. At any rate, we are often 
more easily led by example than by conviction; 
example leads us against our convictions. Asked why 
we did this or that, knowing we should not have done 
it, we answer with simian honesty, "because such 
a one did it, or invited us to do it." We get over a 
good many old-fashioned notions concerning modesty 
and purity, after listening to the experiences of others ; 
we foreet to be ashamed in the presence of the brazen, 



SCANDAL. 



the unabashed and the impudent. We feel partially 
justified in doing what we see done by one to whom 
we are accustomed to look up. "If he acts thus," we 
say, *'how can it be so very wrong in me ; and if 
everybody — and everybody sometimes means a very 
few — if everybody does so, it cannot be so bad as I 
first imagined." Thus may be seen the workings of 
scandal in the mind and soul of its victim. Remem- 
bering our natural proneness to carnal indulgence, 
it is not surprising that the victims of scandal are 
so many. But this cannot be taken as an apology 
for the scandal-giver; rather the contrary, since the 
malice of his sin has possibilities so unbounded. 

Scandal supposes an inducement to commit sin, 
which is not the case when the receiver is already 
al^ disposed to sin and is as bad as the giver. Nor 
^n scandal be said properly to be given when those 
who receive it are in all probability immune against 
the evil. Some people say they are scandalized when 
they are only shocked; if what shocked them has 
nothing in it to induce them into sinning, then their 
received scandal is only imaginative, nor has any been 
given. Then, the number of persons scandalized 
must be considered as an aggravating circumstance. 
Finally, the guilt of scandal is greater or less accord- 
ing to the helplessness of the victim or intended 
victim, and to the sacredness of his or her right to 
immunity from temptation, children being most sacred 
in this respe<:t. 

Of course God is merciful and forgives us our 
offenses however great they may be. We may undo 
a deal of wrong committed by us in this life, and 
die in the state of grace, even after the most abomin- 
able crimes. Theologically, therefore, the idea has 
little to commend itself, but it must have occurred 
to more than one: how does one feel in heaven, 
know^ing that there is in hell, at that moment, one 
or many through his or her agency! How mysterious 
is the justice of God to suffer such a state of affairs! 



254 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



And although theoretically possible, how can anyone 
count on such a contingency in his or her particular 
case! If the scandalous would reflect seriously on 
this, they would be less willing to take the chances 
offered by a possibility of this nature. 



CHAPTER LXXXII. 
NOT GOOD TO BE ALONE. 

A MAN may come to discover that the state in 
which he finds himself placed, is not the one for 
which he was evidently intended by the Maker. We 
do not all receive the same gifts because our callings 
are different; each of us is endowed in accordance 
and in harmony with the ends of the Creator in 
making us. Some men should marry, others may 
not; but the state of celibacy is for the few, and 
not for the many, these few depending solely on an 
abundant grace of God. 

Again, one may become alive to the fact that 
to remain in an abnormal position means to seriously 
jeopardize his soul's salvation; celibacy may, as for 
many it does, spell out for him, clearly and plainly, 
eternal damnation. It is to no purpose here to 
examine the causes of, and reasons for, such a con- 
dition of affairs. We take the fact as it stands, 
plain and evident, a stern, hard fact that will not be 
downed, because it is supported by the living proof 
of habit and conduct; living and continuing to live 
a celibate, taking him as he is and as there is every 
token of his remaining without any reasonable 
ground for expecting a change, this main is doomed 
to perdition. His passions have made him their 
slave; he cannot, it is morally impossible for him 
to do so, remain continent. 



NOT GOOD TO BE ALONE. 



255 



Suppose again that the Almighty has created the 
state of wedlock for just such emergencies, whereby 
a man may find a remedy for his weaknesses, an out- 
let for his passions, a regulator of his life here below 
and a security against damnation hereafter; and this 
is precisely the case, for the ends of marriage are not 
only to perpetuate the species, but also to furnish a 
remedy for natural concupiscence and to raise a bar- 
rier against the flood of impurity. 

Now, the case being as stated, need a Catholic, 
young or — a no longer young — ^man look long or 
strive hard to find his path of duty already clearly 
traced? And in making this application we refer to 
man, not to woman, for reasons that are obvious ; 
we refer, again, to those among men whose spiritual 
sense is not yet wholly dead, who have not entirely 
lost all respect for virtue in itself : who still claim to 
have an immortal soul and hope to save it; but who 
have been caught in the maelstrom of vice and whose 
passions and lusts have outgrown in strength the ordi- 
nary resisting powers of natural virtue and religion 
incomplete and half-hearted. These can appreciate 
their position; it would be well for them to do so; 
the faculty for so doing may not always be left with 
them. 

The obligation to marry, to increase and multi- 
ply, was given to mankind in general, and applies 
to man as a whole, and not to the individual ; that is, 
in the common and ordinary run of human things. 
But the circumstances with which we are dealing are 
outside the normal sphere; they are extraordinary, 
that is say, they do not exist in accordance with the 
plan and order established by God; they constitute 
a disorder resulting from unlawful indulgence and 
wild impiety. It may therefore be, and it frequently 
is the case, that the general obligation to marry 
particularize itself and fall with its full weight on the 
individual, this one or that one, according to the cir- 
cumstances of his life. Then it is that the voice of 



256 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



God's authority reaches the ear of the unit and says 
to him in no uncertain accents : thou shalt marry. And 
behind that decree of God stands divine justice to 
vindicate the divine right. 

We do not deny but that, absolutely speaking, 
recourse to this remedy may not be imperiously 
demanded; but we do claim that the absolute has 
nothing whatever to do with the question which is 
one of relative facts. What a supposed man may 
do in this or that given circumstance does not in the 
least alter the position of another real, live man who 
will not do this or that thing in a given circumstance ; 
he will not, because, morally speaking, he cannot; 
and he cannot, simply because through excesses he 
has forgotten how. And of other reasons to justify 
non-compliance with the law, there can be none ; it is 
here at question of saving one's soul; inconveniences 
and difficulties and obstacles have no meaning in 
such a contingency. 

And, mind you, the effects of profligate celibacy 
are farther-reaching than many of us would suppose 
at first blush. The culprit bears the odium of it in his 
soul. But what about the state of those — or rather 
of her, whoever she may be, known or unknown — 
whom he, in the order of Providence, is destined to 
save from the precariousness of single life? If it is 
his duty to take a wife, whose salvation as well as 
his own, perhaps depends on the fulfilment of that 
duty, and if he shirks his duty, shall he not be held 
responsible for the results in her as well as in himself, 
since he could, and she could not, ward off the evil? 

It has come to such a pass nowadays that 
celibacy, as a general thing, is a misnomer for 
profligacy. Making all due allowance for honorable 
exceptions, the unmarried male who is not well 
saturated with spirituality and faith is notoriously 
gallinaceous in his morals. In certain classes, he is 
expected to sow his wild oats before he is out of his 
teens ; and by this is meant that he will begin young 



NOT GOOD TO BE ALONE. 



to tear into shreds the Sixth Commandment so as 
not to be bothered with it later in life. If he 
married he would be safe. 

Finally what kind of an existence is it for any 
human being, with power to do otherwise, to pass 
through life a worthless, good-for-nothing nonentity, 
living for self, shirking the sacred duties of 
paternity, defrauding nature and God and sowing 
corruption where he might be laying the foundation 
of a race that may never die? There is no one to 
whom he has done good and no one owes him a tear 
when his barren carcass is being given over as food 
to the worms. He is a rotten link on the chain of 
life and the curse of oblivion will vindicate the claims 
of his unborn generations. Young man, marry, 
marry now, and be something in the world besides an 
eyesore of unproductiveness and worthlessness ; do 
something that will make somebody happy besides 
yourself ; show that you passed, and leave something 
behind that will remember you and bless your name. 



CHAPTER LXXXni. 

A HELPING HAND. 

The moralist is usually severe, and the quality 
of his censure is merciless, when he attempts to treat 
the unwholesome theme of moral deformity ; and all 
his efforts are mere attempts, for no human 
language can do full justice to such a theme, or 
fully express the contempt such excesses deserve. It 
is just, then, that, when he stands in the presence of 
the moral leper who blushes not for his degradation, 
he flay with the whip of scorn and contempt, scourge 
with anathema and brand him with every stigma of 



258 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



infamy, in order that the load of opprobrium thus 
heaped upon his guilty head may at least deter the 
clean from such defilement. 

But, if guilt is always guilt, the quality of guilt 
is varied. Just as all virtue is not equally meritorious, 
so to other sources than personal unworthiness may 
often be traced moral debility that strives against 
natural causes, necessary conditions of environment 
and an ever-present and ever-active influence for evil. 
A fall does not always betoken profound degradation, 
nor a stain, acute perversity of the will. Those 
therefore who wrestle manfully with the effects of 
regretted lapses or weaknesses, who fight down, 
sometimes perhaps unsuccessfully, the strong 
tendencies of a too exuberant animal nature, who 
strive to neutralize an influence that unduly oppresses 
them, — against these, guilty though they may have 
been, is not directed the moralist's unmeasured 
censure. His reproaches in such cases tend less to 
condemn than to awake to a sense of moral 
responsibility ; earnestness in pointing out remedy and 
safeguards takes the place of severity against 
wilfulness. For he knows that not a few sentences 
of condemnation Christ writes on the sands, as He 
did in a celebrated case, and many an over-zealous 
accuser he has confounded, like the villainous 
Pharisees whom He challenged to show a hand white 
enough to be worthy to cast the first stone. 

Evidently such pity and commiseration should 
not serve to make vice less unlovely and thus undo the 
very work it is intended to perform. It should not 
have the characteristics of certain books and plays 
that pretend to teach morality by exposing vice in all 
its seductiveness. Over-sensitive and maudlin sympathy 
is as ridiculous as it is unhealthy; its tendency is 
principally to encourage and spoil. But a judicious, 
discreet and measured sympathy will lift up the fallen, 
strengthen the weak and help the timorous over many 
a difficulty. It will suggest, too, the means best 



A HELPING HAND, 



259 



calculated to insure freedom from slavery of the 
passions. 

The first of these is self-denial, which is the 
inseparable companion of chastity; when they are not 
found together, seldom does either exist. And by 
self-denial is here meant the destruction of that eternal 
]■ reference for self^ that is at the bottom of all 
uncleanness, that makes all things, however sacred, 
subservient to one's own pleasures, that considers 
nothing unlawful but what goes against the grain 
of natural impulse and natural appetites. There may 
be other causes, but this self-love is a primary one. 
Say what you will, but one does not fall from his 
own level ; the moral world is like the physical ; if you 
are raised aloft in disregard for the laws of truth, 
you are going to come down with a thud. If you 
imagine all the pleasures of life made for you, 
and become lawful because your nature craves for 
them, you are taking a too high estimate of yourself ; 
you are going before a fall. He who takes a correct 
measure of himself, gets his bearings in relation to 
God, comes to realize his own weak points and several 
deficiencies, aind acknowledges the obligations such a 
state of affairs places upon him, that one may sin, but 
he will not go far. 

He may fall, because he is human, because 
strength sufficient to guard us against the assaults of 
impurity is not from us, but from God. The spirit 
of humility, therefore, which makes known to him 
his own insufficiency, must be fortified with the spirit 
of faith which makes him ask for support through 
prayer. It is faith that makes prayer possible, and 
living faith, the spirit of faith, that makes us pray 
aright. This kind of prayer need not express itself 
in words ; it may be a habit, a long drawn out desire, 
an habitual longing for help coupled with firm 
confidence in God's mercy to grant our request. No 
state of soul however disordered can long resist such 



26o 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



a power, and no habit of evil but in time will be 
annihilated by it. 

The man or woman who undertakes to keep 
himself or herself pure, or to rise out of a habit of 
sin without the liberal use of divine supplication has in 
hand a very ungrateful task, and he or she will realize 
it before going far. And unless that prayer is sincere 
and heartfelt, a prayer full of faith that will not 
entertain the thought of failure, every effort will be 
barren of results. You must speak to God as to one 
near you, and remember that He is near you all the 
time. 

Then there are the sacraments to repair every 
breach and to heal every wound. Penance will cleanse 
you, communion will adorn and equip you anew. 
Confession will give you a better knowledge of yourself 
every time you go; the Food of God will strengthen 
every fibre of your soul and steel you against the 
seductions that otherwise would make you a ready 
victim. Don't go once a year, go ten, twenty times 
and more, if necessary, go until you feel that you own 
yourself, that you can command and be obeyed. Then 
you will not have to be told to stop ; you will be safe. 



CHAPTER LXXXIV. 

THOU SHALT NOT STEAL. 

The Seventh Commandment is protective of the 
right of property which is vested in every human 
being enjoying the use of reason. Property means 
that which belongs to one, that which is one's own, 
to have and to hold, or to dispose of, at one's pleasure, 
or to reclaim in the event of actual dispossession. The 



THOU SHALT NOT STEAL. 



right of property embraces all things to which may 
be affixed the seal of ownership; and it holds good 
until the owner relinquishes his claim, or forfeits or 
loses his title without offense to justice. This natural 
faculty to possess excludes every alien right, and 
supposes in all others the duty and obligation to respect 
it. The respect that goes as far as not relieving the 
owner of his goods is not enough; it must safeguard 
him against all damage and injury to said goods; 
otherwise his right is non-existent. 

All violations of this right come under the 
general head of stealing. People call it theft, when 
it is effected with secrecy and slyness ; robbery, when 
there is a suggestion of force or violence. The 
swindler is he who appropriates another's goods by 
methods of gross deception or false pretenses while 
the embezzler transfers to himself the funds entrusted 
to his care. Petty thieving is called pilfering or 
filching; stealing on a large scale usuadly has less 
dishonorable qualificatives. Boodling and lobbying are 
called politics ; watering stock, squeezing out legitimate 
competition, is called financiering; wholesale confisca- 
tion and unjust conquest is called statesmanship. Give 
it whatever name you like, it is all stealing; whether 
the culprit be liberally rewarded or liberally punished, 
he nevertheless stands amenable to God's justice which 
is outraged wherever human justice suffers. 

Of course the sin of theft has its degrees of 
gravity, malice and guilt, to determine which, that is, 
to fix exactly the value of stolen goods sufficient 
to constitute a grievous fault, is not the simplest and 
easiest of moral problems. The extent of delinquency 
may be dependent upon various causes and complex 
conditions. On the one hand^ the victim must be 
considered in himself, and the amount of injury 
sustained by him; on the other, justice is offended 
generally in all cases of theft, and because justice is 
the corner stone of society, it must be protected at all 
hazards. It is only by weighing judiciously all these 



262 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



different circumstances that we can come to enunciate 
an approximate general rule that will serve as a guide 
in the ordinary contingencies of life. 

Thus, of two individuals deprived by theft of a 
same amount of worldly goods, the one may suffer 
thereby to a much greater extent than the other; 
he who suffers more is naturally more reluctant to 
part with his goods, and a greater injustice is done 
to him than to the other. The sin committed against 
him is therefore greater than that committed against 
the other. A rich man may not feel the loss of a dollar, 
whereas for another less prosperous the loss of less 
than that sum might be of the nature of a calamity. 
To take therefore unjustly from a person what to that 
person is a notable amount is a grievous sin. It is 
uniformly agreed that it is a notable loss for a man 
to be unduly deprived of what constitutes a day's 
sustenance. This is the minimum of grievous matter 
concerning theft. 

But this rule will evidently not hold good applied 
on a rising scale to more and more extensive fortunes ; 
for a time would come when it would be possible 
without serious guilt to appropriate good round sums 
from those abundantly blessed with this world's goods. 

The disorders necessarily attendant on such a 
moral rule are only too evident; and it is plain that 
the law of God cannot countenance abuses of this 
nature. Justice therefore demands that there be a 
certain fixed sum beyond which one may not go 
without incurring serious guilt ; and this, independent 
of the fortune of the person who suffers. Theolo- 
gians have fixed that amount approximately, in this 
country, at five dollars. This means that when such 
a sum is taken, in all cases, the sin is mortal. It is not 
always necessary, it is seldom necessary, that one 
should steal this much in order to offend grievously ; 
but when the thief reaches this amount, be his victim 
ever so wealthy, he is guilty of grave injustice. 



THOU SHALT NOT STEAL. 263 

This rule applies to all cases in which the neighbor 
is made to sulfer unjustly in his lawful possessions ; 
and it effects all wrongdoers whether they steal or 
destroy another's goods or co-operate efficaciously in 
such deeds of sin. It matters not whether the harm 
be wrought directly or indirectly, since in either case 
there may be moral fault ; and it must be remembered 
that gross negligence may make one responsible as 
well as malice aforethought. 

The following are said to co-operate in crime to 
the extent of becoming joint-partners with the principal 
agent in guilt: those in whose name the wrong is done, 
in obedience to their orders or as a result of any other 
means employed ; those who influence the culprit by 
suggesting motives and reasons for his crime or by 
pointing out efficient means of arriving thereat ; those 
who induce others to commit evil by playing on their 
weaknesses thereby subjecting them to what is known 
as moral force ; those who harbor the thief and conceal 
his stolen property against their recovery; those 
whose silence is equivalent to approbation, permission 
or official consent ; those finally who before, during or 
after the deed, abstain from performing a plain duty 
in preventing, deterring or bringing to justice the 
guilty party. Such persons as the foregoing 
participate as abettors in crime and share all the guilt 
of the actual criminals ; sometimes the former are 
even more guilty than the latter. 

The Tenth Commandment which forbids us to 
covet our neighbor's goods, bears the same relation 
to the Seventh as the Ninth does to the Sixth. It must, 
however, be borne in mind that all such coveting 
supposes injustice in desire, that is, in the means by 
which we desire to obtain what is not ours. To wish 
for, to long ardently for something that appeals to 
one^s like and fancy is not sinful ; the wrong consists 
in the desire to acquire it unjustly, to steal it, and 
thereby work damage unto the neighbor. It is a 
natural weakness in man to be dissatisfied with what 



264 MORAL BRIEFS. 

he has and to sigh after what he has not; very few 
of us are free from this faiHng. But so long as our 
cravings and hankerings are not tainted with injustice, 
we are innocent of evil. 



CHAPTER LXXXV. 
PETTY THEFTS. 

A QUESTION may arise as to petty thefts, venial 
in themselves, but oft repeated a.nd aggregating in the 
long run a sum of considerable value: how are we 
to deal with such cases? Should peculations of this 
sort be taken singly, and their individual malice 
determined, without reference to the sum total of 
injustice caused; or shouM no severe judgment be 
paiSsed until such a time as sufficient matter be 
accumulated to make the fault grievous? In other 
words, is there nothing but venial sin in thefts of little 
values, or is there only one big sin at the end? The 
difficulty is a practical one. 

If petty thefts are committed with a view to 
amass a notable sum, the simple fact of such an 
intention makes the offense a mortal one. For, as we 
have already remarked in treating of the human act, 
our deeds may be, and frequently are, vitiated by the 
intention we have in performing them. If we do 
something with evil intent and purpose, our action 
is evil whether the deed in itself be indifferent or even 
good. Here the intention is to cause a grave injustice ; 
the deed is only a petty theft, but it serves as a means 
to a more serious offense. The act therefore takes its 
malice from the purpose of the agent and becomes 
sinful in a high degree. 



PETTY THEFTS. 



265 



As to each repeated theft, that depends again on 
the intention of the culprit. If in the course of his 
pilferings he no longer adverts to his first purpose 
and has no intention in stealing beyond that of helping 
himself to a little of his neighbor's goods, he is guilty 
of nothing more than a venial sin. If, however, the 
initial purpose is present at every act, if at every 
fresh peculation the intention to accumulate is renewed 
explicitly or implicitly, then every theft is identical 
with the first in malice, and the ofifender commits 
mortal sin as often as he steals. Thus the state of soul 
of one who filches after this fashion is not sensibly 
afifected by his arriving at a notable sum of injustice 
in the aggregate. The malice of his conduct has 
already been established ; it is now completed in deed. 

A person who thievishly appropriates small sums, 
but whose pilferings have no moral reference to each 
other, will find himself a mortal offender the moment 
his accumulated injustices reach the amount we have 
qualified as notable, provided he be at that moment 
aware of the fact, or even if he only have a doubt 
about the matter. And this is true whether the stolen 
sums be taken from one or from several persons. Even 
in the latter case, although no one person sufifers 
serious damage or prejudice, justice however is 
seriously violated and the intention of the guilty party 
is really to perpetrate grave injustice. 

However, such thefts as these which in the end 
become accumulative, must of their nature be 
successive and joined together by some bond of moral 
union, otherwise they could never be considered a 
whole. By this is meant that there must not exist 
between the different single thefts an interruption or 
space of time such as to make it impossible to consider 
reasonably the several deeds as forming one general 
action. The time generally looked upon as sufficient 
to prevent a moral union of this kind is two months. 
In the absence therefore of a specific intention to 
arrive at a large amount by successive thefts, it must 



266 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



be said tha-t such thefts as are separated by an inter- 
vening space of two months can never be accounted 
as parts of one grave injustice, and a mortal sin can 
never be committed by one whose venial offenses are 
of this nature. Of course if there be an evil purpose, 
that alone is sufficient to establish a moral union 
between single acts of theft however considerable the 
interval that separates them. 

Several persons may conspire to purloin each a 
limited amount. The circumstance of conspiracy, 
connivance or collusion makes each co-operator in the 
deed responsible for the whole damage done ; and if 
the amount thus defrauded be notable, each is guilty 
of mortal sin. 

We might here add in favor of children who 
take small things from their parents and of wives 
who sometimes relieve their husbands of small change, 
that it is natural that a man be less reluctant to being 
defrauded in small matters by his own than by total 
strangers. It is only reasonable therefore that more 
latitude be allowed such delinquents when there is 
question of computing the amount to be considered 
notable ; perhaps the amount might be doubled in their 
favor. The same might be said in favor of those 
whose petty thefts are directed against several victims 
instead of one, since the injury sustained individually 
is less. 

The best plan is to leave what does not belong to 
one severely alone. In other sins there may be 
something gained in the long run, but here no such 
illusion can be entertained, for the spectre of restitution, 
as we shall see, follows every injustice as a shadow 
follows its object, and its business is to see that no 
man profit by his ill-gotten goods. 



CHAPTER LXXXVL 



AN OFT EXPLOITED, BUT SPECIOUS PLEA. 

It is not an infrequent occurrence for persons 
given to the habit of petty thefts and fraud, to seek 
to justify their irregular conduct by a pretense of 
justice which they call secret compensation. They 
stand arraigned before the bar of their conscience on 
the charge of filching small sums, usually from their 
employers ; they have no will to desist ; they therefore 
plead not guilty, and have nothing so much at heart 
as to convince themselves that they act within their 
rights. They elaborate a theory of justice after their 
ideas, or rather, according to their own desires ; they 
bolster it up with facts that limp all the way from 
half-truths to downright falsities ; and thus acquit 
themselves of sin, and go their way in peace. A judge 
is always lenient when he tries his own case. 

Secret compensation is the taking surreptitiously 
from another of the equivalent of what is due to one, 
of what has been taken and is kept against all justice, 
in order to indemnify oneself for losses sustained. 
This sort of a thing, in theory at least, has a perfectly 
plausible look, nor, in fact, is it contrary to justice, 
when all the necessary conditions are fulfilled to the 
letter. But the cases in which these conditions a.re 
fulfilled are so few and rare that they may hardly be 
said to exist at all. It is extremely difficult to find 
such a case, and nearly always when this practice is 
resorted to, the order of justice is violated. 

And if common sense in the case of any given 
individual fail to show him this truth, we here quote 
for his benefit an authority capable of putting all his 
doubts at rest. The following proposition was 



268 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



advanced: "Domestic servants who adjudge them- 
selves underpaid for services rendered, may appropriate 
to themselves by stealth a compensation." This 
proposition has received the full weight of papal 
condemnation. It caimot be denied that it applies to 
all who engage their services for hire. To maintain 
the contrary is to revolt against the highest authority 
in the Church ; to practise it is purely and simply to 
sin. 

A case is often made out on the grounds that 
wages are small, work very hard and the laborer 
therefore insufficiently remunerated. But to conclude 
therefrom the right to help oneself to the employer's 
goods, is a strange manner of reasoning, while it 
opens the door to all m^anner of injustice. Where is 
there a man, whatever his labor and pay, who could 
not come to the same conclusion? Who may not 
consider himself ill-paid ? And who is there that really 
thinks he is not w^orth more than he gets? There is 
no limit to the value one may put on one's own 
services ; and he who is justified to-day in taking 
a quarter of a dollar, would be equally justified 
to-morrow in appropriating the whole concern. And 
then- what becomes of honesty, a^nd the right of 
property ? And what security can anyone have against 
the private judgment of his neighbor? 

And what about the contract according to the 
terms of which you are to give your services and to 
receive in return a stipulated amount? Was there 
any clause therein by which you are entitled to change 
the terms of said contract without consulting the other 
party interested? You don't think he would mind it. 
You don't think anything of the kind ; you know he 
will and does mind it. He may be generous, but he 
is not a fool. 

"But I make up for it. I work overtime, work 
harder, am more attentive to my work; and thereby 
save more for my employer than I take." Here you 
contradict yourself. You are therefore not under- 



AN OFT EXPLOITED, BUT SPECIOUS PLEA. 269 

paid. And if you furnish a greater amount 
of labor than is expected of you, that is your 
business and your free choice. And the right you 
have to a compensation for such extra labor is entirely 
dependent on the free will of your employer. People 
usually pay for what they call for; services uncalled 
for are gratuitous services. To think otherwise 
betokens a befuddled state o"f mind. 

"But I am forced to work harder and longer than 
we agreed." Then it is up to you to remonstrate 
with your employer, to state the case as it is and to 
ask for a raise. If he refuses, then his refusal is your 
cue to quit and go elsewhere. It mea.ns that your 
services are no longer required. It means, at any rate, 
that you have to stand the cut or seek to better your 
condition under other employers. It is hard! Of 
course it is hard, but no harder than a great many other 
things we have to put up with. 

If my neighbor holds unjustly what belongs to 
me, or if he has failed to repair damages caused, to 
recover my losses by secret compensation has the same 
degree of malice and disorder. The law is instituted 
for just such purposes; you have recourse thereto. 
You may prosecute and get damages. If the courts 
fail to give you justice, then perhaps there may be 
occasion to discuss the merits of the secret compen- 
sation theory. But you had better get the advice of 
some competent person before you a.ttempt to put it 
in practice ; otherwise you are liable to get into a bigger 
hole than the one you are trying to get out of. 

Sometimes the bold assertion is advanced that 
the employer knows perfectly that he is being 
systematically robbed and tolerates it. It is incumbent 
on this party to prove his assertion in a very simple 
way. Let him denounce himself to his employer and 
allow the truth or falsity thereof hang on the result. 
If he does not lose his job inside of twenty-four hours 
after the interview, he may continue his peculations in 
perfect tranquillity of conscience. If he escapes 



270 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



prosecution through the consideration of his former 
employer, he must take it for granted that the toleration 
he spoke of was of a very general nature, the natural 
stand for a man to take who is being robbed and 
cannot help it. To justify oneself on such a principle 
is to put a premium on shrewd dishonesty. 



CHAPTER LXXXVIL 

CONTUMELY. 

The Eighth Commandment concerns itself with 
the good name of the neighbor; in a general way, it 
reproves all sins of the tongue, apart from those 
already condemned by the Second and Sixth 
commandments, that is to say, blasphemous and impure 
speech. It is as a weapon against the neighbor and 
an instrument of untruth that the tongue is here 
considered. 

By a good name is here intended the esteem in 
which a person is held by his fellow-men. Call it 
reputation, character, fame, renown, etc., a. good name 
means that the bearer is generally considered above 
reproach in all matters of honesty, moral integrity and 
worth. It does not necessarily imply that such esteem 
is manifested exteriorly by what is technically known 
as honor, the natural concomitant of a good name ; 
it simply stands for the knowledge entertained by 
others of our respectability and our title to honor. A 
good name is therefore one thing; honor is another. 
And honor consists precisely in that manifestation on 
the part of our fellows of the esteem and respect 
in which they hold us, the fruit of our good name, 
the homage rendered to virtue, dignity and merit. As 



CONTUMELY. 



271 



it may therefore be easily seen, these two things— a 
good name and honor — differ as much as a sign differs 
from the thing signified. 

The Eighth Commandment protects every man^s 
honor; it condemns contumely which is an attack 
upon that honor. Contumely is a sign of contempt 
which shows itself by attempting to impair the honor 
one duly receives ; it either strives to prevent that 
honor being paid to the good name that naturally 
deserves it, or it tries to nullify it by offering just the 
contrary, which is contumely, more commonly called 
affront, outrage, insult. 

Now, contumely, as you will remark, does not 
seek primarily to deprive one of a good name ; which 
it nearly always succeeds in doing, and this is called 
detraction; but its object is to prevent your good 
name from getting its desert of respect, your character 
supposedly remaining intact. The insult offered is 
intended to effect this purpose. Again, all contumely 
presupposes the presence of the party affronted; the 
affront is thrown in one's fa;ce, and therein consists 
the shocking indecency of the thing and its specific 
malice. 

It must be remembered that anger, hatred, the 
spirit of vengeance or any other passion does not 
excuse one from the guilt of contumely. On the 
other hand, one's culpability is not lessened by the 
accidental fact of one's intended insults going wide 
of the mark and bearing no fruit of dishonor to the 
person assailed. To the malice of contumely may, 
and is often, added that of defamation, if apart from 
the dishonor received one's character is besmirched 
in the bargain. Contumely against parents offends 
at the same time filial piety ; against God and His 
saints, it is sacrilegious ; if provoked by the practice 
of religion and virtue, it is impious. If perpetrated 
in deed, it may offend justice properly so called ; if it 
occasion sin in others, it is scandalous ; if it drive the 



272 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



victim to excesses of any kind, the guilt thereof is 
shared by the contumeHous agent. 

Sometimes insult is offered gratuitously, as in the 
case of the weak, the old, the cripple and other 
unfortunates who deserve pity rather than mockery ; 
the quality of contumely of this sort is brutal and 
fiendish. Others will say for justification: "But he 
said the same, he did the same to me. Can I not defend 
myself?" That depends on the sort of defense you 
resort to. All weapons of defense are not lawful. If 
a man uses evil mea;ns to wrong you, there is no 
justification, in Christian ethics, for you to employ 
the same means in order to get square, or even to 
shelter yourself from his abuse. The *'eye-for-eye" 
principle is not recognized among civilized and 
Christian peoples. 

This gross violation of personal respect may be 
perpetrated in many ways ; any expression of contempt, 
offered to your face, or directed against you through 
a representative, is contumely. The usual way to do 
this is to fling vile epithets, to call opprobrious names, 
to make shameful charges. It is not always necessary 
that such names and epithets be inapplicable or such 
charges false, if, notwithstanding, the person in 
question has not thereby forfeited his right to respect. 
In certain circumstances, the epithet "fool" may hold 
all the opprobriousness of contumely: "thief" and 
"drunkard" and others of a fouler nature may be thus 
malicious for a better reason. An accusation of 
immorality in oneself or in one's parents is 
contumelious in a. high degree. Our mothers are a 
favorite target for the shafts of contumely that through 
them reach us. Abuse is not the only vehicle of 
contumely; scorn, wanton ridicule, indecent mockery 
and caricature that cover the unfortunate victim with 
shame and confusion serve the purpose as well. To 
strike one, to spit on one a-nd other ignoble attacks 
and assaults belong to the same category of crime. 



CONTUMELY. 



The malice of contumely is not, of course, equal 
in all cases ; circumstances have a great deal to do 
in determining the gravity of each offense. The more 
conspicuous a person is in dignity and the more worthy 
of respect, the more serious the affront offered him; 
and still more grave the offense, if through him many 
others are attainted. If again no dishonor is intended 
and no offense taken, or could reasonably be taken, 
there is no sin at all. There may be people very low- 
on the scale of respectability as the world judges 
respectability; but it can never be said of a man or 
woman that he or she cannot be dishonored, that he 
or she is beneath contempt. Human nature never 
forfeits all respect; it always has some redeeming 
feature to commend it. 



CHAPTER LXXXVni. 

DEFAMATION. 

Defamation differs from contumely in that the 
one supposes the absence, the other, the presence, of 
the person vilified ; and again, in that the former 
asperses the reputation of the victim while the latter 
attacks the honor due or paid to said reputation. A 
good name is, after the grace of God, man's most 
precious possession ; wealth is mere trash compared 
with it. You may find people who think otherwise, 
but the universal sentiment of mankind stigmatizes 
such baseness and buries it under the weight of its 
opprobrium. Nor is it impossible that 'honor be paid 
where a good character no longer exists ; but this is 
accidental. In the nature of things, reputation is 
the basis of all honor ; if you destroy character, you 



274 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



destroy at the same time its fruit, which is honor. 
Thus will be seen the double malice of defamation. 

To defame therefore is to lessen or to annul 
the estimation in which a person is held by his fellow- 
men. This crime may be perpetrated in two different 
manners: by making known his secret faults, and 
this is simple detraction; and by ascribing to him 
faults of which he is innocent, and this is calumny 
or slander. Thus it appears that a man's character 
may suffer from truth as well as from falsehood. 
Truth is an adorable thing, but it has its time and 
place; the fact of its being truth does not prevent 
it from being harmful. On the other hand, a lie, 
which is evil in itself, becomes abominable when used 
to malign a fellow-man. 

There is one mitigating and two aggravating 
forms of defamation. Gossip is small talk, idle and 
sufBciently discolored to make its subject appear in 
an unfavorable light. It takes a morbid pleasure in 
speaking of the known and public faults of another. 
It picks at little things, and furnishes a steady occu- 
pation for people who have more time to mind other 
people's business than their own. It bespeaks small- 
ness in intellectual make-up and general pusillanimxity. 
That is about all the harm there is in it, and that is 
enough. 

Libel supposes a wide diffusion of defamatory 
matter, written or spoken. Its malice is great because 
of its power for evil and harm. Tale-bearing or back- 
biting is what the name implies. Its object is prin- 
cipally to spread discord, to cause enmity, to break 
up friendships; it may have an ulterior purpose, and 
these are the means it employs. No limit can be set 
to its capacity for evil, its malice is especially infernal. 

It is not necessary that what we do or say of a 
defamatory nature result, as a matter of fact, in 
bringing one's name into disfavor or disrepute; it 
is sufficient that it be of such a nature and have such 
a tendency. If by accident the venomous shaft spend 



DEFAMATION. 



itself before attaining the intended mark, no credit 
is due therefore to him who shot it ; his guilt remains 
what it was when he sped it on its way. Nor is there 
justification in the plea that no harm was meant, that 
the deed was done in a moment of anger, jealousy, 
etc., that it was the result of loquacity, indulged in 
for the simple pleasure of talking. These are excuses 
that excuse not. 

There are those who, speaking in disparagement 
of the neighbor, speak to the point, directly and 
plainly ; others, no less guilty, do it in a covert manner, 
have recourse to subterfuge and insinuation. They 
exaggerate faults and make them appear more odious, 
they put an evil interpretation on the deed or intention ; 
they keep back facts that would improve the situation ; 
they remain silent when silence is condemnatory ; they 
praise with a malignant praise. A mean, sarcastic 
smile or a significant reticence often does the work 
better than many words and phrases. And all this, as 
we have said, independently of the truth or falsehood 
of the impression conveyed. 

Listeners share the guilt of the defamers on the 
principle that the receiver is as bad as the thief. This 
supposes of course that you listen, not merely hear ; 
that you enjoy this sort of a thing and are willing and 
ready to receive the impression derogatory to the 
neighbor's esteem and good name. Of course, if mere 
curiosity makes us listen and our pleasure and amuse- 
ment are less at the expense of the neighbor's good 
name than excited by the style of the narrator or the 
singularity of the facts alleged, the fault is less ; but 
fault there nevertheless is, since such an attitude serves 
to encourage the traducer and helps him drive his 
points home. Many sin who could and should prevent 
excesses of this kind, but refrain from doing so; 
their sin is greater if, by reason of their position, 
they are under greater obligations of correction. 

Although reputation is a priceless boon to all 
men, there are cases wherein it has an especial value 



276 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



on account of the peculiar circumstaiices of a man's 
position. It not infrequently happens that the whole 
success of a man's life depends on his good name. 
Men in public life, in the professions, religious and 
others similiarly placed, suffer from defamation far 
more than those in the ordinary walks of life; and 
na.turally those who injure them are guilty of more 
grievous wrong. And it goes without saying that a 
man can stand an im.moral aspersion better than a 
woman. In all cases the malice is measured by the 
injury done or intended. 



CHAPTER LXXXIX. 

DETRACTION. 

To ABSOLVE oneself of the sin of detraction on 
the ground that nothing but the truth was spoken 
is, as we have seen, one way of getting around a 
difficulty that is no way at all. Some excuses are 
better than none, others are not. It is precisely the 
truth of such talk that makes it detraction ; if it were 
not true, it would not be detraction but calumny — 
another and a very different fault. It would be well 
for such people to reflect for a moment, and ask 
themselves if their own character would stand the 
strain of having their secret sins and failings sub- 
jected to public criticism and censure, their private 
shortcomings heralded from every housetop. Would 
they, or would they not, consider themselves injured 
by such revelations? Then it would be in order for 
them to use the same rule and measure in dealing 
with others. 

He who does moral evil offends in the sight of 
God and forfeits God's esteem and friendship. But 



DETRACTION. 



277 



it does not follow that he should also forfeit the 
esteem of his fellow-men. The latter evil is nothing 
compared with the first; but it is a great misfor- 
tune nevertheless. If a man's private iniquity is 
something that concerns himself and his God, to the 
exclusion of all others^ then whosoever presumes 
to judge and condemn him trespasses on forbidden 
ground, and is open to judgment and condemnation 
himself before his Maker. 

All do not live in stone mansions who throw 
stones. If there is a mote in the neighbor's eye, 
perhaps there is a very large piece of timber in your 
own. Great zeal in belaboring the neighbor for his 
faults will not lessen your own, nor make you appear 
an angel of light before God when you are some- 
thing very different. If you employed this same zeal 
towards yourself, you would obtain more consoling 
results, for charity begins at home. One learns more 
examining one's own conscience than dissecting and 
flaying others alive. 

It may be objected that' since detraction deals 
with secret sins, if the facts related are of public 
notoriety, there is no wrong in speaking of them, 
for you cannot vilify one who is already vilified. This 
is true ; and then, again, it depends. First, these 
faults must be of public notoriety. A judicial sen- 
tence may make them such, but the fact that some, 
many, or a great many know and speak of them will 
not do it. The public is everybody, or nearly every- 
body. Do not take your friends for the public, when 
they are only a fraction thereof. If you do you will 
find out oftener than it is pleasant that your sins 
of detraction are sins of slander; for rumors are 
very frequently based on nothing more substantial 
than lies or distorted and exaggerated facts set afloat 
by a calumniator. 

Even when a person has justly forfeited, and 
publicly, the consideration of his fellowmen, and it 
is not, therefore, injurious to his character to speak 



278 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



of his evil ways, justice may not be offended, but 
charity may be, and grievously. It is a sin, an 
uncharity, to harp on one's faults in a spirit of spite, 
or with the cruel desire to maintain his dishonor; 
to leave no stone unturned in order to thoroughly 
blacken his name. In doing this you sin against 
charity, because you do something you would not 
wish to have done unto you. Justice itself would 
be violated if, even in the event of the facts related 
being notorious, you speak of them to people who 
ignore them and are not likely ever to come to a 
knowledge of them. 

If you add, after telling all you know about a 
poor devil, that he did penance and repaired his sin, 
you must not imagine that such atonement will 
rehabilitate him in the minds of all. Men are more 
severe and unforgiving than God. Grace may be 
recovered, but reputation is a thing which, once lost, 
is usually lost for good. Something of the infamy 
sticks; tears and good works will not, cannot wash 
it away. He, therefore, who banks too much on human 
magnanimity is apt to err ; and his erring constitutes a 
fault. 

"But I confided the secret to but one person; 
and that one a dear friend, who promised to keep it." 
Yes, but the injured party has a right to the esti- 
mation of that one person, and his injury consists 
precisely in being deprived of it. Besides, you 
accuse yourself openly. Either what you said was 
void of all harm^ or it was not. In the one case, 
why impose silence! In the other, why not begin 
yourself by observing the silence you impose upon 
others! Your friend will do what you did, and the 
ball you set rolling will not stop until there is nothing 
left of your victim's character. 

Of course there are times when to speak of 
another's faults is derogatory neither to justice nor 
to charity; both may demand that the evil be re- 
vealed. A man to defend himself may expose his 



DETRACTION. 



279 



accuser's crookedness; in court his lawyer may do 
it for him, for here again charity begins at home. In 
the interests of the delinquent, to effect his correction, 
one may reveal his shortcomings to those who have 
authority to correct. And it is even admitted that 
a person in trouble of any kind may without sin, 
for the purpose of obtaining advice or consolation, 
speak to a judicious friend of another's evil ways. 

Zeal for the public good may not only excuse, 
but even require that the true character of a bad 
man be shown up and publicly censured. Its object 
is to prevent or undo evil, to protect the innocent; 
it is intended to destroy an evil influence and to make 
hypocrisy fly under his own colors. Immoral writers, 
living or dead, corrupt politicians and demagogues, 
unconscionable wretches who prey on public ignorance, 
may and should be, made known to the people, 
to shield them is to share their guilt. This should 
not be done in a spirit of vengeance, but for the 
sole purpose of guarding the unwary against vultures 
who know no law, and who thrive on the simplicity 
of their hearers. 



CHAPTER XC. 

CALUMNY. 

To THE malice of detraction calumny adds that of 
falsehood. It is a lie, which is bad ; it is a report pre- 
judicial to the character of another, which is worse ; 
it is both combined, out of which combination springs 
a third malice, which is abominable. All the more 
so, since there can exist no excuse or reason in 
the light of which this sin may appear as a human 



280 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



weakness. Because slander is the fruit of deliberate 
criminal spite, jealousy and revenge, it has a char- 
acter of diabolism. The calumniator is not only a 
moral assassin, but he is the most accomplished type 
of the coward known to man. If the devil loves a 
cheerful liar, he has one here to satisfy his affections. 

This crime is one that can never be tolerated, no 
matter what the circumstances ; it can never be justi- 
fied on any grounds whatsoever; it is instrinsically 
evil, a sin of injustice that admits no mitigation. When 
slander is sworn to before the courts, it acquires a 
fourth malice, that of irreligion, and is called false 
testimony. It is not alone perjury, for perjury does 
not necessarily attack the neighbor's good name ; it is 
perjured calumny, a crime that deserves all the repro- 
bation it receives in this world — and in the next. 

To lie outright, deliberately and with malice 
aforethought, in traducing a fellow-man, is slander 
in its direct form; but such conditions are not 
required to constitute a real fault of calumny. It 
is not necessary to be certain that what you allege 
against your neighbor be false ; it is sufficient that you 
be uncertain if it be true. An unsubstantiated charge 
or accusation, a mere rumor given out as worthy of 
belief, a suspicion or doubt clothed so as to appear 
a certainty, these contain all the malice and all the 
elements of slander clearly characterized. Charity, 
justice and truth alike are violated, guilt is there in 
unquestioned evidence. Whatever subterfuge, equiv- 
ocation or other crooked proceeding be resorted to, if 
mendacity in any form is a feature of the aspersions 
we cast upon the neighbor, we sin by calumny, purely 
a.nd simply. 

Some excuse themselves on the plea that what 
they say, they give out for what it is worth ; they 
heard it from others, and take no responsibility as to 
its truth or falsehood. But here we must consider 
the credulity of the hearers. Will they believe it, 
whether you do or not? Are they likely to receive 



CALUMNY. 



281 



it as truth, either because they are looking for 
just such reports, or because they know no better? 
And whether they beUeve it or not, will they, on your 
authority, have sufficient reason for giving credence to 
your words ? May it not happen that the very fact of 
your mentioning what you did is a sufficient mark of 
credibility for others? And by so doing, you con- 
tribute to their knowledge of what is false, or what 
is not proven true, concerning the reputation of a 
neighbor. 

For it must be remembered that all imprudence is 
not guiltless, all thoughtlessness is not innocent of 
wrong. It is easy to calumniate a person by qualifying 
him in an off-hand way as a thief, a blackleg, a fast- 
liver, etc. It is easy, by adding an invented detail to 
a statement, to give it an altogether different color 
and turn truth into falsehood. But the easiest way is 
to interpret a man's intentions according to a dislike, 
and, by stringing in such fancies with a lot of facts, 
pass them on unsuspecting credulity that takes all or 
none. If you do not think well of another, and the 
occasion demand it, speak it out; but make it known 
that it is your individual judgment and give your 
reasons for thus opining. 

The desperate character of calumny is that, while 
it must be repaired, as we shall see later, the thing is 
difficult, often impossible; frequently the reparation 
increases the evil instead of diminishing it. The 
slogan of unrighteousness is: "Calumniate, calimi- 
niate, some of it will stick !" He who slanders, lies ; 
he who lies once may lie again, a liar is never worthy 
of belief, whether he tells the truth or not, for there 
is no knowing when he is telling the truth. One has 
the right to disbelieve the calumniator when he does 
wrong or when he tries to undo it. And huma.n 
nature is so constructed that it prefers to believe in 
the first instance and to disbelieve in the second. 

You may slander a community, a class as well as 
an individual. It is not necessary to charge all with 



282 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



crime ; it is sufficient so to manipulate your words 
tha-t suspicion may fall on any one of said class or 
community. If the charge be particularly heinous, or 
if the body of men be such that all its usefulness 
depends on its reputation, as is the case especially 
with religious bodies, the malice of such slander 
acquires a dignity far above the ordinary. 

The Church of God has suffered more in the long 
centuries of her existence from the tongue of slander 
than from sword and flame and chains combined. In 
the mind of her enemies, any weapon is lawful with 
which to smite her, and the climax of infamy is reached 
when they affirm, to justify their dishonesty, that they 
turn Rome's weapons against her. There is only one 
answer to this, and that is the silence of contempt. 
Slander and dollars are the wheels on which moves the 
propaganda that would substitute Gospel Christianity 
for the superstitions of Rome. It is slander that vilifies 
in convention and synod the friars who did more for 
pure Christianity in the Philippines in a hundred 
years than the whole nest of their revilers will do in 
ten thousand. It is slander that holds up to public 
ridicule the congregations that suffer persecution and 
exile in France in the name of liberty, fraternity, etc. 
It is slander that the long-tailed missionary with the 
sanctimonious face brings back from the countries of 
the South with which to regale the minds of those who 
furnish the Bibles and shekels. And who will measure 
the slander tha-t grows out of the dunghill of Protestant 
ignorance of what Catholics really believe! 



CHAPTER XCI. 



RASH JUDGMENT. 

The Eighth Commandment is based on the natural 
right every fellow-man has to our good opinion, unless 
he forfeits it justly and publicly. It forbids all injury 
to his reputation, first, in the estimation of others, 
which is done by calumny and detraction ; secondly, 
in our own estimation, and this is done by rash judg- 
ment, by hastily and without sufficient grounds think- 
ing evil of him, forming a bad opinion of him. He 
may be, as he has a right to be, anxious to sta^nd well 
in our esteem as well as in the esteem of others. 

A judgment, rash or otherwise, is not a doubt, 
neither is it a suspicion. Everybody knows what a 
doubt is. When I doubt if another is doing or has 
done wrong, the idea of his or her guilt simply enters 
my mind, occurs to me and I turn it over and around, 
from one side to another, without being satisfied to 
accept or reject it. I do not say: yes, it is true; 
neither do I say: no, it is not true. I say nothing, I 
pass no judgment; I suspend for the moment all 
judgment, I doubt. 

A doubt is not evil unless there be absolutely no 
reason for doubting, and then the doubt is born of 
passion and malice. And the evil, whatever there is 
of it, is not in the doubt's entering our mind — 
something beyond our control ; but in our entertaining 
the doubt, in our making the doubt personal, which 
supposes an act of the will. 

Stronger than doubt is suspicion. When I suspect 
one, I do not keep the balance perfectly even between 
yes and no, as in the case of doubt; I lean mentally 
to one side, but do not go so far as to assent one way 



284 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



or the other. Having before me a person who excites 
my suspicion, I am incUned to think him guilty on 
certain evidence, but I fear to judge lest I should be 
in error, because there is evidence also of innocence. 
If my suspicion is based on good grounds, it is naitural 
and lawful; otherwise it is rash and sinful; it is 
uncharitable and unjust to the person suspected. A 
suspicion often hurts more than an accusation. 

Doubt and suspicion, when rash, are sinful; but 
the malice thereof is not grave unless they are so 
utterly unfounded as to betoken deep-seated antipathy 
and aversion and a perverse will ; or unless in peculiar 
circumstances the position of the person is such as to 
make the suspicion gravely injurious and not easily 
condoned. There is guilt in keeping that suspicion 
to oneself ; to give it out in words is calumny, 
whether it be true or not, simply because it is 
unfounded. 

In a judgment there is neither doubt nor 
suspicion; I make my own the idea presented to my 
mind. The balance of assent^ in which is weighed, 
the evidence for and against, is not kept even, nor is 
it partially inclined ; it goes down with its full weight, 
and the party under consideration stands convicted 
before the tribunal of my judgment. I do not say, I 
wonder if he is guilty; nor he most likely is guilty; 
but: he is guilty — here is a deliberate judgment. 
Henceforth my esteem ceases for such a person. 
Translated in words such a. judgment is not calumny 
because it is supposedly founded in reason ; but it is 
detraction, because it is injurious. 

Such a judgment, without any exterior expression, 
is sinful if it is rash. And what makes it rash? The 
insufficiency of motive on which it is based. And 
whence comes the knowledge of such sufficiency or 
insufficiency of motive? From the intelligence, but 
mostly from the conscience. That is why many 
unintelligent people judge rashly and sin not, because 
they know no better. But conscience nearly always 



RASH JUDGMENT. 



285 



supplies intelligence in such matters and ignorance 
does not always save us from guilt. An instinct, the 
wee voice of God in the soul, tells us to withhold 
our judgment even when the Intelligence fails to weigh 
the motives aright. To contemn this voice is to sin 
and be guilty of rash judgment. 

In the language of ordinary folks, not always 
precise and exact in their terms, an opinion is 
frequently a judgment, to think this or that of another 
is often to judge him accordingly. The suspicions of 
suspicious people are at times more than suspicions 
and are clearly characterized judgments. To render 
a verdict on the neighbor's character is a judgment, 
by whatever other name it is called; all that is 
necessary is to come to a definite conclusion and to 
give the assent of the will to that conclusion. 

When the conduct of the neighbor is plainly open 
to interpretation, if we may not judge immediately 
against him, neither are we bound to give him the 
benefit of the doubt; we may simply suspend all 
judgment and await further evidence. In our exterior 
dealings this suspicion should not affect our conduct, 
for every m.an has a right to be treated as an honest 
man and does not forfeit that right on the ground of a 
mere probability. This, however, does not prevent 
us from taking a cue from our suspicion and acting 
guardedly towards him. This does not mean that we 
adjudge him dishonest, but that we deem him capable 
of being dishonest, which is true and in accordance 
with the laws of prudence. 

Neither are we bound to overlook all evidence 
that points to a man's guilt through fear of judging 
him unfavorably. It is not wrong to judge a man 
according to his merits, to have a right opinion of him, 
even when that opinion is not to his credit. All that 
is necessary is that we have good reason on which to 
base that opinion. If a neighbor does evil in our 
presence or to our knowledge he forfeits, and justly, 
our good opinion ; he is to blame, and not we. We 



286 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



are not obliged to close our eyes to the truth of facts, 
and it is on facts that our judgments are formed. 



CHAPTER XCII. 
M'ENDACITY. 

To LIE is to utter an untruth, with full knowledge 
that it is an untruth. The untruth may be expressed 
by any conventional sign, by word, deed, gesture, or 
even by silence. Its malice and disorder consists in 
the opposition that exists between our idea and the 
expression we give to it ; our words convey a meaning 
contrary to what is in our mind; we say one thing 
and mean another. If we unwittingly utter what is 
contrary to fact, that is error; if we so clumsily 
translate our thoughts as to give a false impression 
of what we mean, and we do the best we can, that is 
a blunder ; if in a moment of listlessness and inattention 
we speak in a manner that conflicts with our state of 
mind, that is tempora-ry mental aberration. But if we 
knowingly give out as truth what we know is not 
the truth, we lie purely and simply. 

In misrepresentations of this kind it is not 
required that there be a plainly formulated purpose 
of deceiving another; an implicit intention, a 
disposition to allow our words to run their natural 
course, is sufficient to give such utterances a character 
of mendacity. For, independently of our mental 
attitude, it is in the nature of a lie to deceive; an 
intention, or rather a pretense to the contrary, does 
not affect that nature. The fact of lying presupposes 
that we intend in some manner to practise deception ; 
if we did not have such purpose we would not resort 
to lying. If you stick a knife into a man, you may 



MENDACITY. 



287 



pretend what you like, but you did certainly intend to 
hurt him and make him feel badly. 

Nor has any ulterior motive we may have in telling 
an untruth the power to change its nature; a lie is a 
lie, no matter what prompted it. Whether it serves 
the purpose of amusement, as a jocose lie ; or helps to 
gain us an advantage or get us out of trouble, as an 
officious lie; or injures another in any way, as a 
pernicious lie: mendacity is the character of our 
utterances, the guilt of willful falsehood is on our 
soul. A restriction should, however, be made in favor 
of the jocose lie ; it ceases to be a He when the mind 
of the speaker is open to all who listen and his 
narration or statement may be likened to those fables 
and myths and fairy tales in which is exemplified the 
charm of figurative language. When a person says 
what is false and is convinced that all who hear him 
know it is false, the contradiction between his mind 
and its expression is said to be material, and not 
formal ; and in this the essence of a lie does not consist. 

A lie is always a sin ; it is what is called an 
intrinsic evil and is therefore always wrong. And 
why is this? Because speech was given us to express 
our thoughts; to use this faculty therefore for a 
contrary purpose is against its nature, against a laiW 
of our being, and this is evil. The obnoxious 
consequences of falsehood, as it is patent to all, consti- 
tute an evil for which falsehood is responsible. But 
deception, one of those consequences, is not in itself 
and essentially, a moral fault. Deception, if not 
practised by lying and therefore not mtended but 
simply suffered to occur, and if there be grave reason 
for resorting to this means of defense, cannot be put 
down as a thing offensive to God or unjustly 
prejudicial to the neighbor. But when deception is 
the effect of mendacity, it assumes a character of malice 
that deserves the reprobation of man as it is condemned 
by God. And this is another reason why lying is 
essentially an evil thing, and can never, under any 
circumstances be allowed or justified. 



288 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



This does not mean that lying is always a mortal 
sin. In fact, it is oftener venial than mortal. It 
becomes a serious fault only in the event of another 
malice being added to it. Thus, if I lie to one who 
has a right to know the truth and for grave reasons ; 
if the mendacious information I impart is of a nature 
to mislead one into injury or loss, and this thing I 
do maliciously; or if my lying is directly disparaging 
to another; in these cases there is grave malice and 
serious guilt. But if there is no injustice resulting 
from a lie, I prevaricate against right in lying, but 
my sin is not a» serious offense. 

This is a vice that certainly deserves to be fought 
against and punished always and in all places, 
especially in the young who are so prone thereto, first 
because it is a sin; and again, beca/use of the social 
evils that it gives rise to. There is no gainsaying the 
fact that in the code of purely human morals, lying is 
considered a very heinous offense that ostracizes a 
man when robbery on a large scale, adultery and other 
first-degree misdemeanors leave him perfectly 
honorable. This recalls an instance of a recent court- 
room. A young miscreant thoroughly imbued with 
Pharisaic morals met with a bold face, without a blush 
or a flinch, accusations of misconduct, robbery and 
murder ; but when charged with being a liar, he sprang 
at his accuser in open court and tried to throttle him. 
His fine indignation got the best of him; he could 
not stand that. 

Among pious-minded people two extreme errors 
are not infrequently met with. The one is that a lie 
is not wrong unless the neighbor suffers thereby ; the 
falsity of this we have already shown. According to 
the other, a lie is such an evil that it should not be 
tolerated, not one lie, even if all the souls in hell were 
thereby to be liberated. To this we answer that we 
would like to get such a chance once ; we fear we 
would tell a whopper. It would be wicked, of course ; 
but we micrht expect leniency from the just Judge 
under the circumstances. 



CHAPTER XCIII. 



CONCEALING THE TRUTH. 

The duty^ always to tell the truth does not imply 
the obligation always to tell all you know; and 
falsehood does not always follow as a result of not 
revealing your mind to the first inquisitive person 
that chooses to put embarrassing questions. Alongside, 
but not contrary to, the duty of veracity is the right 
every man has to personal and professional secrets. 
For a man's mind is not public property; there may 
arise at times circumstances in which he not only 
may, but is in duty bound to withold information that 
concerns himself intimately or touches a third person ; 
and there must be a means to protect the sacredness 
of such secrets against undue curiosity and inquis- 
itiveness, without recourse to the unlawful method of 
lying. Silence is not an effective resource, for it not 
infrequently gives consent one or the other way; the 
question may be put in such a manner that affirmation 
or negation will betray the truth. To what then shall 
one have recourse? 

Let us remark in the first place that God has 
endowed human intelligence with a native wit, 
sharpness and cunning that has its legitimate uses, the 
exercise of this faculty is evil only when its methods 
and ends are evil. Used along the lines of moral 
rectitude strategy and tact for profiting by circum- 
stances are perfectly in order, especially when one acts 
in the defense of his natural rights. And if this talent 
is employed without injustice to the neighbor or 
violence to the law of God, it is no more immoral than 
the plain telling of truth ; in fact it is sometimes better 
than telling the truth. 



290 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



But it must be understood that such practices 
must be justified by the circumstances. They suppose 
in him who resorts thereto a right to withhold informa- 
tion that overrides the right of his interrogator. If 
the right of the latter to know is superior, then the 
hiding of truth would constitute an injustice, which 
is sinful, and this is considered tantamount to lying. 
And if the mea.ns to which we resort is not lying, as 
we have defined it, that is, does not show a contra- 
diction between what we say and what we mean, then 
there can be no fear of evil on any side. 

Now, suppose that instead of using a term 
whose signification is contrary to what my mind 
conceives, which would be falsehood, I employ a 
word that has a natural double meaning, one of 
which is conform to my mind, the other at variance. 
In the first place, I do not speak against my mind; 
I say wha.t I think ; the word I use means what I mean. 
But the other fellow ! that is another matter. He may 
take his choice of the two meanings. If he guesses 
aright, my artifice has failed ; if he is deceived, that is 
his loss. I do him no injustice, for he had no right 
to question me. If my answer embarrasses him, that 
is just wha.t I intended, and I am guilty of no evil for 
that; if it deceives him, that I did not intend but 
willingly suffer; I am not obliged to enter into 
explanations when I am not even bound to answer him. 
Of the deception, he alone is the cause ; I am the 
occasion, if you will, but the circumstances of his 
inquisitiveness made that occasion necessary, and I 
am not responsible. 

This artifice is called equivocation or amphibology ; 
it consists in the use of words that have a natural 
double meaning; it supposes in him who resorts to it 
the right to conceal the truth, a right superior to that 
of the tormentor who questions him. When these 
conditions are fulfilled, recourse to this method is 
perfectly legitimate, but the conditions must be 



CONCEALING THE TRUTH. 



291 



fulfilled. This is not a weapon for convenience, but 
for necessity. It is easy to deceive oneself when it 
is painful to tell the truth. Therefore it should be 
used sparingly: it is not for every-day use, only 
emergencies of a serious nature ca.n justify its employ. 

Another artifice, still more delicate and dangerous, 
but just as legitimate when certain conditions are 
fulfilled, is what is known as mental restriction. This 
too consists in the employ of words of double meaning ; 
but whereas in the former case, both meanings are 
naturally contained in the word, here the term 
employed has but one natural signification, the other 
being furnished by circumstances. Its legitimate use 
supposes that he to whom the term is directed should 
either in fact know the circumstances of the case 
that have this peculiar significance, or that he could 
and should know them. If the information drawn 
from the a<nswer received is insufficient, so much the 
better ; if he is misinformed, the fault is his own, since 
neither genuine falsehood nor evident injustice can be 
attributed to the other. 

An example will illustrate this better than 
anything else. Take a physician or lawyer, the 
custodian of a professional secret, or a priest with 
knowledge safeguarded by the seal of the confessional. 
These men either may not or should not reveal to 
others unconcerned in the matter the knowledge they 
possess. There is no one but should be aware of this, 
but should know that when they are questioned, they 
will answer as laymen, and not as professionals. They 
will answer according to outside information, yes or 
no, whether on not such conclusion agree with the 
facts they obtained under promise of secrecy. They 
simply put out of their mind as unserviceable all 
professional knowledge, and respond as a man to a 
man. Their standing as professional men puts every 
questioner on his guard and admonishes him that no 
private information need be expected, that he must 
take the answer given as the conclusion of outside 



292 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



evidence, then if he is deceived he has no one to blame 
but himself, since he was warned and took no heed of 
the warning. 

Again we repeat, the margin between mental 
restriction and falsehood is a safe, but narrow one, 
the least bungling may merge one into the other. It 
requires tact and judgment to know when it is 
permissible to have recourse to this artifice and how 
to practise it safely. It is not a thing to be trifled with. 
In only rare circumstances can it be employed, and only 
few persons have the right to employ it. 



CHAPTER XCIV. 

RESTITUTION. 

A PECULIAR feature attaches to the sins we have 
recently treated, against the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and 
Eighth commandments. These offenses differ from 
others in that they involve an injury, an injustice to 
our fellow-man. Now, the condition of pardon for 
sin is contrition ; this contrition contains essentially 
a firm purpose that looks to the future, and removes 
in a measure, the liabiiity to fall again. But with the 
sins here in question that firm purpose not only looks 
forward, but backward as well, not only guarantees 
against future ill-doing, but also repairs the wrong 
criminally effected in the past. This is called 
restitution, the undoing of wrong suffered by our 
neighbor through our own fault. The firm purpose 
to make restitution is just as essential to contrition as 
the firm purpose to sin no more; in fact, the former 
is only a form of the latter. It means that we will 
not sin any more by prolonging a culpable injustice. 



RESTITUTION. 



And the person who overlooks this feature when he 
seeks pardon has a moral constitution and make-up 
that is sadly in need of repairs; and of such persons 
there are not a few. 

Justice that has failed to protect a man's right 
becomes restitution when the deed of wrong is done. 
Restitution therefore that is based on the natural right 
every maai has to have and to hold what is his, to 
recover it, its value or equivalent, when unduly 
dispossessed, supposes an act of injustice, that is, the 
violation of a strict right. This injustice, in turn, 
implies a moral fault, a moral responsibility, direct or 
indirect; and the fault must be grievous in order to 
induce a grave obligation. Now, it matters not in the 
least what we do, or how we do it, if the neighbor 
suffer through a fault of ours. If any human creature 
sustains a loss to life or limb, damage to his or her 
social or financial standing, and such injury can be 
traced to a moral delinquency on our pa,rt, we are in 
conscience bound to make good the loss and repair 
the damage done. To do evil is bad ; to perpetuate it 
is immeasurably worse. To refuse to remove the evil 
is to refuse to remove one's guilt; and as long as one 
persists in such a refusal, that one remains under the 
wrath of God. 

Restitution concerns itself with things done or left 
undone, things said or left unsaid ; it does not enter 
the domain of thought. Consequently, just as an 
accident does not entail the necessity of repairing the 
injury that another sustains, neither does the deliberate 
thought or desire to perpetrate an injustice entail such 
a consequence. Even if a person does all in his power 
to effect an evil purpose, and fails, he is not held to 
reparation, for there is nothing to repair. As we have 
said more than once, the will is the source of all malice 
in the sight of God ; but injustice to man requires 
material as well as formal malice; sin must have its 
complement of exterior deed before it can be called 
human injustice. 



294 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



We deem it unnecessary to dwell upon the 
gravity of the obligation to make restitution. The 
balance of justice must be maintained exact and 
impartial in this world, or the Almighty will see that 
it is done in the next. The idea that God does not 
stand for justice destroys the idea that God exists. 
And if the precept not to commit injustice leaves the 
guilty one free to repair or not to repair, that precept 
is self -contradictory and has no meaning at all. If 
a right is a right, it is not extinguished by being 
violated and if justice, is something more than a mere 
sound, it must protect all rights whether sinned 
against or not. 

It might be convenient for some people to force 
upon their conscience the lie that restitution is of 
counsel rather than of precept, under the plea that it is 
enough to shoulder the responsibility of sin without 
being burdened with the obligation of repairing it, but 
it is only a soul well steeped in malice that will take 
seriously such a contention. Neither is restitution a 
penance imposed upon us in order to atone for our 
faults ; it is no more penitential in its nature than are 
the efforts we make to avoid the faults we have fallen 
into in the past. It atones for nothing; it is simply 
a desisting from evil. When this is done and forgive- 
ness obtained, then, and not till then, is it time to think 
of satisfying for the temporal punishment due to sin. 

Naturally it is much more easy to abstain from 
committing injustice than to repair it after it is done. 
It is often very difficult and very painful to face the 
consequences of our evil ways, especially when all 
satisfaction is gone and nothing remains but the hard 
exigencies of duty. And duty is a thing that it costs 
very little to shirk when one is already hardened by a 
habit of injustice. That is why restitution is so little 
heard of in the world. It is a fact to be noted that the 
Catholic Church is the only religious body that dares 
to enforce strictly the law of reparation. Others 
vaguely hold it, but rarely teach it, and then only in 



RESTITUTION. 



295 



flagrant cases of fraud. But she allows none of her 
children to approach the sacraments who has not 
already repaired, or who does not promise in all 
sincerity to repair, whatever wrong he may have done 
to the neighbor. Employers of Catholic help some- 
times feel the effects of this uncompromising attitude 
of the Church ; they are astonished, edified and 
grateful. 

We recall with pleasure an incident of an apostate 
going about warning people against the turpitudes of 
Rome and especially against the extortions of her 
priests through the confessional. He explained how 
the benighted papist was obliged under pain of eternal 
damnation to confess his sins to the priest, and then 
was charged so much for each fault he had been guilty 
of. An incredulous listener wanted to know if he, the 
speaker, while in the toils of Rome had ever been 
obliged thus to disgorge in the confessional, and was 
answered with a triumphant affirmation. At which 
the wag hinted that it would be a good thing not to 
be too outspoken in announcing the fact as his reputa- 
tion for honesty would be likely to suffer thereby, for 
he knew, and all Catholics knew, who were those 
whose purse the confessor pries open. 



CHAPTER XCV. 

UNDOING THE EVIL. 

Whenever a person, through a spirit of malice 
or grossly culpable negligence, becomes responsible 
for serious bodily injury sustained by another, he is 
bound, as far as in him lies, to undo the wrong and 
repair the injustice committed. The law of personal 



296 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



rights that forbade him to lay violent hands on another, 
now commands that the evil be removed by him who 
placed it. True, physical pain and tortures cannot 
be repaired in kind; physical injury and disability are 
not always susceptible of adequate reparation. But 
there is the loss incurred as a result of such disability, 
and this loss may affect, not one alone, but many. 

Death, too, is of course absolutely irreparable. 
But the killing of the victim in nowise extinguishes 
the obligation of reparation. The principal object is 
removed; but there remain the loss of wages, the 
expenses necessitated by illness and death; there may 
be a family dependent on the daily toil of the 
unfortunate and made destitute by his removal. One 
must be blind indeed not to see that all these losses 
are laid at the door of the criminal, a direct result of 
his crime, foreseen, too, at least confusedly, since there 
is a moral fault ; and these must be made good, as far 
as the thing is possible, otherwise the sin will not be 
forgiven. 

Slander must be retracted. If you have lied about 
another and thereby done him an injury, you are bound 
in conscience to correct your false statement, to correct 
it in such a manner as to undeceive all whom you 
may have misled. This retraction must really retract, 
and not do just the contrary, make the last state of 
things worse than the first, which is sometimes the 
case. Prudence and tact should suggest means to do 
this effectively: when, how and to what extent it 
should be done, in order that the best results of repa- 
ration may be obtained. But in one way or another, 
justice demands that the slanderer contradict his lying 
imputations and remove by so doing the stain that 
besmirches the character of his victim. 

Of course, if it was by truth and not falsehood, 
by detraction and not calumny, that you assailed and 
injured the reputation of another, there is no gain- 
saying the truth ; you are not justified in lying in order 
to make truth less damaging. The harm done here is 



UNDOING THE EVIL. 



297 



well nigh irreparable. But there is such a thing as 
trying to counteract the influence of evil speech by 
good words, by mentioning qualities that offset defects, 
by setting merit against demerit ; by attenuating as far 
as truth will allow the circumstances of the case, etc. 
This will place your victim in the least unfavorable 
light, and will, in some measure, repair the evil of 
detraction. 

Scandal must be repaired, a mightily difficult 
task; to reclaim a soul lost to evil through fatal 
inducements to sin is paramount, almost, to raising 
from the dead. It is hard, desperately hard, to ha.ve 
yourself accepted as an angel of light by those for 
whom you have long been a demon of iniquity. Good 
example! Yes, that is about the only argument you 
have. You are handicapped, but if you wield that 
argument for good with as much strength and intensity 
as you did for evil, you will have done all that can be 
expected of you, and something may come of it. 

The wrong of bodily contamination is a deep one. 
It is a wrong, and therefore unjust, when it is effected 
through undue influence that either annuls consent, or 
wrings it from the victim by cajolery, threat, or false 
promise. It becomes immeasurably aggravated when 
the victim is abandoned to bear alone the shame and 
burdensome consequences of such injustice. 

Matrimony is the ordina<ry remedy; the civil law 
will force it; conscience may make it an obligation, 
and does make it, unless, in rare cases, there be such 
absolute incompatibility as to make such a contract 
an ineffective and ridiculous one, an inefficient remedy, 
or none at all. When such is the case, a pecuniary 
compensation is the only alternative. A career has 
been blasted, a future black with despair stares the vic- 
tim in the face, if she must face it unaided ; a burden 
forced upon her that must be borne for years, entailing 
considerable expense. The man responsible for such 
a state of affairs, if he expects pardon for his crime, 
must shoulder the responsibility in a manner that will 



298 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



repair at lea-st in part the grave injustice under which 
his victim labors. 

If both share the guilt, then both must share the 
burden. If one shirks, the other must assume the 
whole. The great victim is the child. That child must 
get a Christian bringing-up, or some one will suffer 
for it ; its faith must be safeguarded. If this cannot 
be done at home, then it must be placed where this 
can be done. If it is advantageous for the parent or 
parents that their offspring be raised in ignorance of 
its origin, it is far more advantageous for the child 
itself. Let it be confided to good hands, but let the 
money necessary for its support be forthcoming, since 
this is the only way to make reparation for the evil 
of its birth. 

I would add a word in regard to the injustice, 
frequent enough, of too long deferring the fulfilment of 
marriage promises. For one party, especially, this 
period of waiting is precarious, fraught with danger 
and dangerous possibilities. Her fidelity makes her 
sacrifice all other opportunities, and makes her future 
happiness depend on the fulfilment of the promise 
given. Cha.rms do not last forever; attractions fade 
with the years. If affection cools^ she is helpless to 
stir up the embers without unmentionable sacrifice. 
There is the peril. The man who is responsible for it, 
is responsible for a good deal. He is committing an 
injustice; there is danger of his not being willing to 
repair it, danger that he may not be able to repair it. 
His line of duty is clear. Unless for reasons of the 
gravest importance, he cannot in surety of conscience 
continue in a line of conduct that is repugnant alike 
to natural reason and common decency, and that 
smacks of moral make-up that would not bear the 
scrutiny of close investigation. 



CHAPTER XCVI. 



PAYING BACK. 

A MAN who has stolen, has nothing more urgent 
and imperative to perform, on this side of eternity, 
than the duty of refunding the money or goods unjustly 
acquired, or the value thereof. He may possibly con- 
sider something else more important; but if he does, 
that man has somehow unlearned the first principles of 
natural honesty, ignores the fundamental law that 
governs the universe, and he will have a difficult time 
convincing the Almighty that this ignorance of his is 
not wholly culpable. The best and only thing for him 
;to do is to make up his mind to pay up, to disgorge his 
ill-gotten goods, to make good the losses sustained 
^by his neighbor through his fault. 

He may, or may not, have profited to any great 
extent by his criminal proceedings ; but there is no 
doubt that his victim suffered injustice; and that 
precisely is the root of his obligation. The stolen goods 
may have perished in his hands and he have nothing to 
show ; the same must be said of the victim the moment 
his possessions disappeared ; with this difference, how- 
ever, that justice was not violated in one case, and in 
the other, it was. The lawful owner may be dead, or 
unfindable among the living ; but wherever he may be, 
he never intended that the thief should enjoy the fruit 
of his crime. The latter's title, vitiated in its source, 
cannot be improved by any circumstance of the owner's 
whereabouts. No one may thrive on one's own dis- 
honesty. 

You say this is hard ; and in so saying, you lend 
testimony to the truth of the axiom that honesty is 
the best policy. There is no one but will agree with 



300 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



you; but such a statement, true tliough it be, helps 
matters very Httle. It is always hard to do right; 
blame Adam and Eve for it, and think of something 
more practicable. But must I impoverish myself? 
Not to the extent of depriving yourself of the 
necessaries of life. But you must deprive yourself to 
the extent of settling your little account, even if you 
suffer something thereby. But how shall I be able to 
refund it all ! You may never be able to refund it all ; 
but you may start in immediately and do the best you 
can ; resolve to keep at it ; never revoke your purpose 
to cancel the debt. In case your lease of life expires 
before full justice is done, the Almighty may take into 
consideration your motives and opportunities. They 
do say that hell is paved with good intentions ; but 
these intentions are of the sort that are satisfied with 
never coming to a state of realization. 

But I shall lose my position, be disgraced, 
prosecuted and imprisoned. This might happen if you 
were to write out a brief of your crime and send the 
same, signed and sworn to, to your employer. But 
this is superfluous. You might omit the details and 
signature, enclose the sum and trust luck for the rest. 
Or you might consult your spiritual adviser ; he might 
have had some experience in this line of business. 
The essential is not that you be found out, but that 
you refund. 

It may happen that several are concerned in a 
theft. In this case, each and every participant, in 
the measure of his guilt, is bound to make restitution. 
Guilt is the object, restitution is the shadow; the 
following is fatal. To order or advise the thing done ; 
to influence efficaciously its doing ; to assist in the deed 
or to profit knowingly thereby, to shield criminally the 
culprit, etc., this sort of co-operation adds to the guilt 
of sin the burden of restitution. Silence or inaction, 
when plain duty would call for words and deeds to 
prevent crime, incriminates as well as active participa- 
tion, and creates an obligation to repair. 



PAYING BACK. 



There is more. Conspiracy in committing an 
injustice adds an especial feature to the burden of 
restitution. If the parties to the crime had formed a 
preconcerted plan and worked together as a whole 
in its accomplishment, every individual that furnished 
efficient energy to the success of the undertaking is 
liable, in conscience, not for a share of the loss, but 
for the sum total. This is what is called solidarity; 
solidarity in crime begets solidarity in reparation. 
It means that the injured party has a just claim for 
damages, for all damages sustained, against any one 
of the culprits, each one of whom, in the event of his 
making good the whole loss, has recourse against the 
others for their share of the obligation. It may hap- 
pen, and does, that one or several abscond, and thus 
shirk their part of the obligation ; the burden of resti- 
titution may thus be unevenly distributed. But this is 
one of the risks that conspirators in sin must take ; the 
injured party must be protected first and in preference 
to all others. 

No Catholic can validly receive the sacrament 
of penance who refuses to assume the responsibility of 
restitution for injustices committed, and who does not 
at least promise sincerely to acquit himself at the first 
favorable opportunity and to the extent of his capacity. 
This means that only on these conditions can the sin 
be forgiven by God. That man is not disposed 
sufficiently to receive absolution who continually 
neglects opportunities to keep his promise ; who refuses 
to pay any, because he cannot pay all ; who decides 
to leave the burden of restitution to his heirs, even 
•with the wherewith to do so. It is better not to go 
to confession at all than to go with these dispositions ; 
it is better to wait until you can make up your mind. 



CHAPTER XCVII. 



GETTING RID OF ILL-GOTTEN GOODS. 

It may happen that a person discover among his 
legitimately acquired possessions something that does 
not in reality belong to him. He may have come by it 
through purchase, donation, etc. ; he kept it in good 
faith, thinking that he had a clear title to it. He now 
finds that there was an error somewhere, and that it 
is the property of some one else. Of course, he is not 
the lawful owner, and does not become such by virtue 
of his good faith; although, in certain given circum- 
stances, if the good faith, or ignorance of error, last 
long enough, a title may be acquired by prescription, 
and the possessor become the lawful owner. But we 
are not considering the question of prescription. 

It is evident, then, that our friend must dispossess 
himself in favor of the real owner, as soon as the latter 
comes upon the scene and proves his claim. But the 
possessor may in all innocence have alienated the 
goods, destroyed or consumed them ; or they may have 
perished through accident or fatality. In the latter 
case, nothing remains to refund, no one is to blame, 
and the owner must bear the loss. Even in the former 
case, if the holder can say in conscience that he in 
nowise became richer by the possession and use of the 
goods in question, he is not bound to make restitution. 
If, however, there be considerable profits, they rightly 
belong to the owner, and the possessor must refund 
the same. 

But the question arises as to how the holder is to 
be compensated for the expenditure made in the 
beginning and in good faith when he purchased the 
goods which he is now obliged to hand over to another. 



GETTING RID OF ILL-GOTTEN GOODS. 303 

Impartial justice demands that when the rightful owner 
claims his goods, the holder relinquish them, and he 
may take what he gets, even if it be nothing. He 
might claim a compensation if he purchased what he 
knew to be another's property, acting in the interests 
of that other and with the intention of returning the 
same to its owner. Otherwise, his claim is against 
the one from whom he obtained the article, and not 
against him to whom he is obliged to turn it over. 

He may, if he be shrewd enough, anticipate the 
serving of the owner's claim and secure himself against 
a possible loss by selling back for a consideration the 
goods in question to the one from whom he bought 
them. But this cannot be done after the claim is 
presented; besides, this proceeding must not render it 
impossible for the owner to recover his property; 
and he must be notified as to the whereabouts of said 
property. This manoeuvre works injustice unto no 
one. The owner stands in the same relation to his 
property as formerly; the subsequent holder assumes 
an obligation that was always his, to refund the goods 
or their value, with recourse against the antecedent 
seller. 

The moment a person shirks the responsibility of 
refunding the possessions, by him legitimately acquired, 
but belonging rightfully to another, that person 
becomes a possessor in bad faith and stands towards 
the rightful owner in the position of a thief. Not in 
a thousand years will he be able to prescribe a just 
title to the goods. The burden of restitution will 
forever remain on him ; if the goods perish, no matter 
how, he must make good the loss to the owner. He 
must also disburse the sum total of profits gathered 
from the illegal use of said goods. If values fluctuate 
during the interval of criminal possession, he must 
compute the amount of his debt according to the values 
that prevailed at the time the lawful owner would 
have disposed of his goods, had he retained possession. 



304 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



Finally, there may be a doubt as to whether the 
object I possess is rightfully mine or not. I must do 
my best to solve that doubt and clear the title to 
ownership. If I fail, I may consider the object mine 
and may use it as such. If the owner turn up after 
the prescribed time, so much the worse for the owner. 
An uncertainty may exist, not as to my proprietorship, 
but as to whom the thing does belong. If my 
possession began in good faith and I am unable to 
determine the ownership, I may consider myself the 
owner until further developments shed more light on 
the matter. 

It is different when the object was originally 
acquired in bad faith. In such a case, first, the ill- 
gotten goods can never be mine; then, there is no 
sanction in reason, conscience or law for the conduct 
of those who run immediately to the first charitable 
institution and leave there their conscience money ; 
or who have masses said for the repose of the souls 
of those who have been defrauded, before they are 
dead at all perhaps. My first care must be to locate 
the victim ; or, if he be certainly deceased or evidently 
beyond reach, the heirs of the victim of my fraud. 
When all means fail and I am unable to find either 
the owner or his heirs, then, and not till then, may I 
dispose of the goods in question. I must assume in 
such a contingency as this, that the will of the owner 
would be to expend the sum on the most worthy cause ; 
and that is charity. The only choice then that remains 
with me is, what hospital, asylum or other enterprise 
of charity is to profit by my sins, since I myself cannot 
be a gainer in the premises. 

It might be well to remark here that one is not 
obliged to make restitution for more than the damages 
call for. Earnestness is a good sign, but it should not 
blind us or drive us to an excess of zeal detrimental 
to our own lawful interests. When there is a reasonable 
and insolvable doubt as to the amount of reparation 
to be made, it is just that such a doubt favor us. If 



GETTING RID OF ILLGOTTEN GOODS. 3 OS 

we are not sure if it be a little more or a little less, 
the value we are to refund, we may benefit by the 
uncertainty and make the burden we assume as light as 
in all reason it can be made. And even if we should 
happen to err on the side of mercy to ourselves, 
without our fault, justice is satisfied, being fallible like 
all things human. 



CHAPTER XCVIII. 
WHAT EXCUSES FROM RESTITUTION. 

Those who do not obtain full jusfice from man 
in this world will obtain it in the next from God. If 
we do not meet our obligations this side of the tribunal 
of the just Judge, He will see to it that our accounts 
are equitably balanced when the time for the final 
reckoning comes. This supposes, naturally, that non- 
fulfilment of obligations is due on our part to 
unwillingness — a positive refusal, or its equivalent, 
wilful neglect, to undo the wrongs committed. For 
right reason and God's mercy must recognize the 
existence of a state of unfeigned and hopeless disability, 
when it is impossible for the delinquent to furnish the 
wherewithal to repair the evils of which he has been 
guilty. When this condition is permanent, and is 
beyond all remedy, all claims are extinguished against 
the culprit, and all losses incurred must be ascribed 
to "an act of God," as the coroner says. For no 
man can be held to what is impossible. 

Chief among these moral, as well as legal, bank- 
rupts is the good-for-nothing fellow who is sorry too 
late, who has nothing, has no hopes of ever having 
anything, and who therefore can give nothing. You 



3o6 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



cannot extract blood from a beet^ nor shekels from an 
empty purse. Then a man may lose all his belongings 
in a catastrophe, and after striving by labor and 
economy to pay off his debts, may see himself obliged 
to give up the task through sickness, misfortune or 
other good causes. He has given all he has, he cannot 
give more. Even though liabilities were stacked up 
mountain-high against him, he cannot be held morally 
responsible, and his creditors must attribute their 
losses to the misfortune of life — a rather unsubstan- 
tial consolation, but as good a one as the poor debtor 
has. 

There are other cases where the obligations of 
restitution are not annulled, but only cancelled for the 
time being, until such a time as circumstances permit 
their being met without grave disaster to the debtor. 
The latter may be in such a position that extreme, or 
great, want would stare him in the face, if he parted 
with what he possesses to make restitution. The 
difficulty here is out of all proportion with the injustice 
committed for, after all, one must live, and charity 
begins at home, our first duty is toward ourselves. 
The creditors of this man have no just claim against 
him until he improves his circumstances ; in the mean- 
time, the burden of responsibility is lifted from his 
shoulders. 

The same must be said when the paying off of a 
debt at any particular time^ be it long or short, would 
cripple a man's finances, wipe out his earnings to 
such an extent as to make him fall considerably below 
his present position in life. We might take a case 
during the late coal famine, of a man who, in order 
to fill his contracts of coal at six dollars a ton, would 
be obliged to buy it at fifteen and twenty dollars a 
ton; and thereby sacrifice his fortune. The thing 
could not be expected, it is preposterous. His 
obligee must wait and hope for better times. 

A man's family is a part of himself. Therefore 
the payment of a just debt may be deferred in ord©r 



WHAT EXCUSES FROM RESTITUTION. 307 

to shield from want parents, wile, children, brothers 
or sisters. Life, limb and reputation are greater 
possessions than riches ; consequently, rather than 
jeopardize these, one may, for the time, put aside his 
obligations to make restitution. 

All this supposes, of course, that during the 
interval of delay the creditor does not suffer incon- 
veniences greater than, or as great as, those the debtor 
seeks to avoid. The latter's right to defer payment 
ceases to exist the moment it comes into conflict with 
an equal right of the former to said payment. It is 
against reason to expect that, after suffering a first 
injustice, the victim should suffer a second in order 
to spare the guilty party a lesser or an equal injury. 
Preference therefore must be given to the creditor 
over the debtor when the necessity for sacrifice is 
equal, and leniency must be refused when it becomes 
cruelty to the former. 

Outside these circumstances, which are rare 
indeed, it will be seen at once that the creditor may 
act an unjust part in pressing claims that accidentally 
and temporarily become invalid. He has a right to his 
own, but he is not justified in vindicating that right, 
if in so doing, he inflicts more damage than equity 
calls for. The culprit has a right not to suffer more 
than he deserves, and it is mock justice that does not 
respect that right. If the creditor does suffer some 
loss by the delay, this might be a circumstance to 
remember at the final settlement but for the present, 
there is an impediment to the working of justice, 
placed by the fatal order of things and it is beyond 
power to remove it. 



CHAPTER XCIX. 



DEBTS. 

Before closing our remarks, necessarily brief and 
incomplete, on this subject, so vast and comprehensive, 
we desire in a few words to pay our respects to that 
particular form of injustice, more common perhaps 
than all others combined, which is known as criminal 
debt, likewise, to its agent, the most brazen impostor 
and unconscionable fraud that afflicts society, the man 
who owes and will not pay. More people suffer from 
bad debts than from stealing and destruction of 
property. It is easier to contract a debt, or to borrow 
a trifle, than to steal it outright; it is safer, too. 
Imprudence is one of the chief characteristics of this 
genus of iniquity. 'T would sooner owe you this than 
cheat you out of it:" this, in word or deed, is the 
highly spiritual consolation they offer those whom they 
fleece and then laugh at. 

The wilful debtor is, first of all, a thief and a 
robber, because he retains unjustly the lawful 
possessions of another. There is no difference between 
taking and keeping what belongs to the neighbor. The 
loss is the same to a man whether he is robbed of a 
certain amount or sells goods for which he gets 
nothing in return. The injustice is the same in both 
cases, the malice identical. He therefore who can pay 
his debts, and will not, must be branded as a thief and 
an enemy to the rights of property. 

The debtor is guilty of a second crime, of 
dishonesty and fraud against his fellow-man, by reason 
of his breaking a contract, entered upon with a party 
in good faith, and binding in conscience until cancelled 
by fulfilment. When a man borrows or buys or runs 



DEBTS. 



an account on credit, he agrees to return a quid pro 
quo, an equivalent for value received. When he fails 
to do so, he violates his contract, breaks his pledge 
of honor, obtains goods under false pretense. Even if 
he is sincere at the time of the making of the contract, 
the crime is perpetrated the moment he becomes a 
guilty debtor by repudiating, in one way or another, 
his just debts. Now, to injure a person is wrong; to 
break faith with him at one and the same time is to 
incur guilt of a double dye. 

There is likewise an element of contumely and 
outrage in such dishonest operations ; the affront 
offered the victim is contemptible. Men have often 
been heard to say, after being victimized by imposture 
of this sort: "I do not mind the loss so much, but I 
do object to being treated like a fool and a monkey." 
One's feelings suffer more than one's purse. Especially 
is this the case when the credit is given or a loan made 
as a favor or service, intended or requested, only to be 
requited by the blackest kind of ingratitude. 

And let us not forget the extent of damage 
wrought unto worthy people in hard circumstances 
who are shut out from the advantages of borrowing 
and buying on credit by the nefarious practices of 
dishonest borrowers and buyers. A burnt child keeps 
away from the fire. A man, after being defrauded 
palpably a few times, acquires the habit of refusing 
nil credit ; and he turns down many who deserve better, 
because of the persecution to which he is subjected 
by rogues and scoundrels. Every criminal debtor 
contributes to that state of affairs and shares the 
responsibility of causing honest people to suffer want 
through inability to get credit. 

And who are the persons thus guilty of a manifold 
guilt? They are those who borrow and buy knowing 
full well they will not pay, pile debt upon debt know- 
ing full well they cannot pay. Others, who do not 
repudiate openly their obligations, put off paying 
indefinitely for futile reasons: hard times, that last 



MORAL BRIEFS. 



forever ; ships coming in, whose fate is yet unlearned ; 
windfalls from rich relatives that are not yet born, etc. ; 
and from delay to delay they become not only less 
able, but less willing, to settle their accounts. 
Sometimes you meet a fellow anxious to square himself 
for the total amount; half his assets is negotiable, the 
other half is gall. He threatens you with the 
alternative of half or none; he wants you to accept 
his impudence at the same figures at which he himself 
values it. And this schemer usually succeeds in his 
endeavor. 

Others there are who protest their determination 
to pay up, even to the last cent; their dun-bills are 
always kept in sight, lest they forget their obligations ; 
they treasure these bills, as one treasures a thing of 
immense value. But they live beyond their means and 
income, purchase pleasure and luxury, refuse to curtail 
frivolous expenses and extravagant outlay. And in the 
meantime their debts remain in statu quo, unredeemed 
and less and less redeemable, their determination holds 
good, apparently ; and the creditor breaks command- 
ments looking on and hoping. 

Some do violence to their thinking faculty by 
trying to find justification, somehow, for not paying 
their debts. The creditor is dead, they say ; or he has 
plenty and can well aflFord to be generous. An attempt 
is often made at establishing a case of occult compen- 
sation, its only merit being its ingenuity, worthy of a 
better cause. All such lame excuses argue a deeper 
perversity of will, a malice well-nigh incurable; but 
they do not satisfy justice, because they are not 
founded on truth. 

A debt has a character of sacredness, like all moral 
obligations ; more sacred than many other moral 
obligations, because this quality is taken directly from 
the eternal prototype of justice, which is God. You 
cannot wilfully repudiate it therefore without repu- 
diating God. You must respect it as you respect Him. 
Your sins and your debts will follow you before the 



DEBTS. 



throne of God. God alone is concerned with your sins ; 
but with your debts a third party is concerned. And 
if God may easily waive His claims against you as a 
sinner, a sterner necessity may influence His judg- 
ment of you as a debtor, through respect for the 
inviolable rights of that third party who does not 
forgive so readily. 



THE END. 



Standard Catholic Books 

PUBLISHED BY 

BENZIGER BROTHERS, 

CINCINNATI: NEW YORK: Chicago: 

343 MAIN ST. 36 AND 38 BARCLAY ST. 211-213 MADISON ST. 



DOCTRINE. INSTRUCTION. DEVOTION. 

Abandonment; or Absolute Surrender of Self to Divine Providence. 

Rev. J. P. Caussade, S.J. net, o 40 

Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. Tesniere. net, i 25 
Anecdotes and Examples Illustrating the Catholic Catechism. 
Selected and Arranged by Rev. Francis Spirago, Professor of 
Theology. Supplemented, Adapted to the Baltimore Cate- 
chism, and Edited by Rev. James J. Baxter, D.D. net, i 50 
Apostles' Creed, The. MuUer, C.SS.R. net, x 10 

Art of Profiting by Our Faults. Rev. J. Tissot. net. o 40 
Beginnings of Christianity. By Very Rev. Thomas J. Shahan. 
S.T.D., J.U.L., Professor of Church History in the Catholic 
University of Washington. net, 2 00 

Bible History. o 50 

Bible History. Practical Explanation and Application of. 

Nash. net, i 50 

Bible, The Holy. i 00 

Book of the Professed. 

Vol. I, net, o 75 

Vol. II. Vol. III. Each. net, o 60 

Boys* and Girls' Mission Book. By the Redemptorist Fathers. 

o 40 

Catechism Explained, The. Spirago-Clarke. net, 2 50 

Catholic Belief. Paa di Bruno. Paper, 0.25; 100 copies, 15 00 

Cloth, 0.50; 25 copies, 7 5° 

Catholic Ceremonies and Explanation of the Ecclesiastical Year. 
Abbe Diorand. Paper, 0.30; 25 copies, 4 50 

Cloth, 0.60; 25 copies, 9 00 

Catholic Practice at Church and at Home. Klauder. 

Paper, 0.30; 25 copies, 4 50 

Cloth, 0.60; 25 copies, 9 00 

Catholic Teaching for Children. Winifride Wray. o 40 



I 



Catholic Worship. Rev. R. Brennan, LL.D. 

Paper 0.15; 100 copies, 10 00 

Cloth, 0.25; 100 copies, 17 00 

Characteristics of True Devotion. Grou, S.J. net, 075 

Charity the Origin of Every Blessing, o 60 

Child of Mary. Prayer-Book. o 60 

Child's Prayer-Book of the Sacred Heart. o 20 

Christian Doctrine, Spirago's Method of. Edited by Bishop 
Messmer. net, i 50 

Christian Father. Cramer. Paper, 0.25; 25 copies, 3 75 

Cloth, 0.40; 25 copies, 6 00 

Christian Mother. Cramer. Paper, 0.25; 25 copies, 3 75 

Cloth, 0.40; 25 copies, 6 00 

Church and Her Enemies. Rev. M. Muller, C.SS.R. net, i 10 
Comedy of English Protestantism. A. F. Marshall. net, 075 
Communion. . Paper, 0.0s; per 100, 3 50 

Complete Office of Holy Week. o 50 

Confession. Paper, 0.05; per 100, net, 3 50 

Confirmation. Paper, 0.05; -per 100, net, 3 50 

Devotion of the Holy Rosary and the Five Scapulars, net, 075 
Devotions and Prayers for the Sick-Room. Krebs, C.SS.R. 

net, I 00 

Devotions for First Friday. Htiguet. o 40 

Dignity and Duties of the Priest; or Selva, a Collection of 
Material for Ecclesiastical Retreats. By St. Alphonsus de 
Liguori. fwt, i 25 

Dignity, Authority, Duties of Parents, Ecclesiastical and 
Civil Powers. By Rev. M. Muller, C.SS.R. net i 40 

Divine Grace. A Series of Instructions arranged according to 
the Baltimore Catechism. Edited by Rev. Edmund J. Wirth, 
Ph.D., D.D. net, i 50 

Divine Office: Explanations of the Psalms and Canticles. By St. 

Alphonsus de Liguori. net, 1 25 

Epistles and Gospels. Large Print. o 25 

Eucharist and Penance. Rev. M. Muller, C.SS.R. net, 1 10 
Eucharistic Christ. Reflections and Considerations on the 
Blessed Sacrament. Rev. A. Tesniere. net, 1 00 

Eucharistic Gems. A Thought about the Most Blessed Sacra- 
ment for Every Day in the Year. Coelenbier. o 75 
Explanation of Commandments, Illustrated. i 00 
Explanation of the Apostles' Creed, Illustrated. 1 00 
Explanation of the Baltimore Catechism of Christian Doc- 
trine. Rev. Th. L. Kinkead. net, i 00 
Explanation of the Commandments, Precepts of the Church. 

Rev. M. Muller. C.SS.R. itet, i 10 

Explanation of the Gospels and of Catholic Worship. Rev. L. 
A. Lambert. Paper, 0.30; 25 copies, 4 50 

Cloth, 0.60; 25 copies, 9 °° 

Explanation of the Holy Sacraments, Illustr.\ted. i 00 



Explanation of the Holy Sacrifice op the Mass. Rev, M. v. 

Cochem. i 25 

Explanation of the Our Father and the Hail Mary. Rev. 

R. Brennan, LL.D. o 75 

Explanation op the Prayers and Ceremonies of the Mass, 
Illustrated. Rev. D. I. Lanslots, O.S.B. i 25 

Explanation of the Salve Regina. Liguori. o 75 

Extreme Unction. Paper, o.io; 100 copies, 6 00 

First and Greatest Commandment. MuUer, C.SS.R. net, i 40 
First Communicant's Manual. o 50 

Flowers of the Passion. Thoughts of St. Paul of the Cross. By 
Rev. Louis Th. de Jesus-Agonisant. o 50 

Following of Christ. Thomas a Kempis. 

With Reflections, o 50 

Without Reflections, o 45 

Edition de luxe, i 25 

Four Last Things, The. Death, Judgment, Heaven, Hell. Med- 
itations. Father M. v. Cochem. Cloth, o 75 
Garland of Prayer. With Nuptial Mass. Leather. o 90 
General Confession Made Easy. Rev. A. Konings, C.SS.R. 

Flexible, 0.15; 100 copies, 10 00 

General Principles of the Religious Life. Verheyen. net, o 30 
Glories of Divine Grace. Dr. M. J. Scheeben. net, i 50 

Glories of Mary. St. Alphonsus de Liguori. 2 vols, net, 2 50 
Popular ed., I vol., i 25 

God the Teacher op Mankind. Miiller. 9 vols. Per set, 9 50 
Goffine's Devout Instructions. 140 Illustrations. Cloth i 00 
25 copies, 17 50 

Golden Sands. Little Counsels for the Sanctification and Hap- 
piness of Daily Life. 
Third Series, o 50 

Fourth Series, o 50 

Fifth Series, o 50 

Grace and the Sacraments. Miiller, C.SS.R. net, i 25 

Great Means of Salvation and of Perfection. St. Alphonsus 
de Liguori. net, 1 25 

Great Supper of God, The. By Rev. S. Coub^, S.J. Edited by 
Rev. F. X. Brady, S.J. Cloth, net, 1 00 

Greetings to The Christ-Child, a Collection of Poems for the 
Young. Illustrated. o 60 

Guide to Confession and Communion. o 60 

Handbook of the Christian Religion. Wilmers, S.J. net, i 50 
Harmony op the Religious Life. Heuser. net, i 25 

Help for the Poor Souls in Purgatory. Prayers and Devotions 
in aid of the Suffering Souls. o 50 

Helps to a Spiritual Life. From the German of Rev. Joseph 
Schneider, S.J. With Additions by Rev. Ferreol Girardey, 
C.SS.R. net, i 25 

Hidden Treasure: The Value and Excellence of the Holy Mass. 
By St. Leonard of Port Maurice. o 50 

3 



History of the Mass. By Rev. J. O'Brien. net, i «s 

Holy Eucharist. By St. Alphonsus de Liguori. The Sacrifice, 
the Sacrament, and the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ. No vena 
to the Holy Ghost. net, i 25 

Holy Mass. By Rev. M. Miiller, C.SS.R. net, i 25 

Holy Mass. By St. Alphonsus de Liguori. net, i 25 

How TO Comfort the Sick. Krebs, C.SS.R. net, i 00 

How to Make the Mission. By a Dominican Father. Paper, o 10 
per 100, 5 00 

Illustrated Prayer-Book for Children. o 25 

Imitation of Christ. See "Following of Christ." 
Imitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Translated by Mrs. A. 
R. Bennett-Gladstone. 
Plain Edition, o 50 

Edition de luxe, i 50 

Imitation op the Sacred Heart. By Rev. F. Amoudt, S.J. En- 
tirely new, reset edition, i 25 
Incarnation, Birth, and Infancy of Jesus Christ; or. The 
Mysteries of Faith. By St. Alphonsus de Liguori. net, i 25 
Indulgences, A Practical Guide to. Bemad, O.M.I. o 75 
In Heaven We Know Our Own. By Pere Blot, S.J. o 60 
Instructions and Prayers for the Catholic Father. Right 
Rev. Dr. A. Egger. o 60 
Instructions and Prayers for the Catholic Mother. Right 
Rev. Dr. A. Egger. o 60 
Instructions and Prayers for Catholic Youth. o 60 
Instructions for First Communicants. Schmitt. net, o 50 
Instructions on the Commandments of God and the Sacraments 
of the Church. By St. Alphonsus de Liguori. 
Paper, 0.2s; 25 copies, 3 75 
Cloth, 0.40; 25 copies, 6 00 
Interior of Jesus and Mary. Grou. 2 vols. net, 2 00 
Introduction to a Devout Life. By St, Francis de Sales. 

Cloth, o so 

Letters op St. Alphonsus de Liguori. 4 vols., each vol., net, 1 25 
Letters of St. Alphonsus Liguori and General Alphabetical Index 
to St. Alphonsus' Works. net, i 25 

Little Altar Boys' Manual. o 25 

Little Book of Superiors. "Golden Sands." tiet, o 60 

Little Child of Mary. A Small Prayer-Book. o 35 

Little Manual of St. Anthony. Lasance. o 25 

Little Manual of St. Joseph. Lings. o 25 

Little Month of May. By Ella McMahon. Flexible, o 25 

Little Month of the Souls in Purgatory. o 25 

Little Office op the Immaculate Conception. 0.05; per 100, 

2 so 

Little Pictorial Lives of the Saints. New, cheap edition, i 00 
Lives op the Saints. With Reflections for Every Day of the 
Year. Large size, i so 

4 



Living Church OF THE Living God. Coppens. o.fo; per loo, 6 oo 
Manual of the Holy Eucharist. Lasance. o 75 

Manual of the Holy Family. o 60 

Manual of the Holy Name. o 50 

Manual of the Sacred Heart, New. o 50 

Manual of the Sodality of the Blessed Virgin. o 50 

Manual of St. Anthony, Little. o 25 

Manual op St. Anthony, New. o 60 

Manual OF St. Joseph, Little. Lings. o 25 

Mari^ Corolla. Poems by Father Edmund of the Heart of 
Mary, CP. Cloth, i 25 

Mass Devotions and Readings on the Mass. Lasance. 

Cloth, o 75 

May Devotions, New. Rev. Augustine Wirth, O.S.B. net, 1 00 
Means OF Grace. By Rev. Richard Brennan, LL.D. 2 50 

Meditations for all the Days op the Year. By Rev. M. 

Hamon, S.S. s vols., net, 5 00 

Meditations for Every Day in the Year. Baxter. net, i 25 
Meditations for Every Day in the Year. Vercruysse, 2 vols., 

net, 2 75 

Meditations for Retreats. St. Francis de Sales. Cloth, net, o 75 
Meditations on the Four Last Things. Cochem. o 75 

Meditations on the Last Words from the Cross. Father 

Charles Perraud. net, o 50 

Meditations on the Life, the Teachings, and the Passion of 

Jesus Christ. Ilg-Clarke. 2 vols., net, 3 50 

Meditations on the Month of Our Lady, MuUaney. o 75 

Meditations on the Passion of Our Lord. o 40 

Method of Christian Doctrine, Spirago's. net, i 50 

Miscellany. Historical Sketch of the Congregation o£ the Most 

Holy Redeemer. Rules and Constitutions of the Congregation 

of the Most Holy Redeemer. Instructions on the Religious 

State. By St. Alphonsus de Liguori. net, i 25 

Mission Book for the Married. Girardey, C.SS.R. o 50 

Mission Book for the Single. Girardey, C.SS.R. o 50 

Mission Book of the Redemptorist Fathers. A Manual of 

Instructions and Prayers to Preserve the Fruits of the Mission. 

Drawn chiefly from the works of St. Alphonsus Liguori. o 50 
Moments Before the Tabernacle. Rev. Matthew Russell, S.J. 

net, o 40 

Month, New, of the Sacred Heart. St. Francis de Sales, o 25 
Month of May: a Series of Meditations on the Mysteries of the 

Life of the Blessed Virgin. B. F. Debussi, S.J. o 50 

Month of the Souls in Purgatory, "Golden Sands." o 25 

Most Holy Rosary. Thirty-one Meditations. Right Rev. W. 

Cramer, D.D. o 50 

Most Holy Sacrament. Rev. Dr. Jos. Keller. o 75 

My First Communion: The Happiest Day of My Life. Brennan. 

o 75 



Mr Little Prayer-Book. Illustrated. 012 

New May Devotions. Wirth. iiet, 1 00 

New Month of the Holy Angels. o 25 

New Month of the Sacred Heart. o 25 

New Sunday-School Companion. o 25 

New Testament. Cheap Edition. 

32mo, flexible cloth, net, o 15 

32mo, lambskin, limp, round corners, gilt edges, net, o 75 

New Testament. Illustrated Edition. 

i6mo, Printed in two colors, with 100 full-page ill., net, o 60 
i6mo, Rutland Roan, limp, solid gold edges, net, i 25 

New Testament. _ India Paper Edition. 

American Seal, Ump, round comers, gilt edges, net, i 00 

Persian Calf, limp, round corners, gilt edges, net, - 25 

Morocco, limp, round corners, gold edges, gold roll inside, net, i 50 
New Testament. Large Print Edition. 

i2mo, large, net, o 75 

1 2mo, French Levant, limp, gold edges, net, 1 25 

New Testament Studies. Conaty, D.D i2mo. o 60 

Office, Complete, of Holy Week. o 50 

On the Road to Rome. By W. Richards. net, o 50 

Our Favorite Devotions. By Very Rev. Dean A. A. Lings, o 75 
Our Favorite Novenas. By Very Rev. Dean A. A. Lings, o 75 
Our Lady of Good Counsel in Genazzano. Dillon, D.D. o 75 
Our Monthly Devotions. By Very Rev. Dean A. A. Lings, i 25 
Our Own Will and How to Detect It in Our Actions. Rev. 

John Allen, D.D. net, o 75 

Paraclete, The. Devotions to the Holy Ghost. o 60 

Paradise on Earth Open to all; A Religious Vocation the Surest 
Way in Life. By Rev. Antonio Natale, S.J. net, o 40 

Parish Priest on Duty, The. A Practical Manual for Pastors, 
Curates, and Theological Students Preparing for the Mission. 
(The Sacraments.) By Rev. Herman J. Heuser, Professor 
of Theology at Overbrook Seminary. net, o 60 

Passion and Death of Jesus Christ. By St. Alphonsus de 
Liguori. net, i 25 

Passion Flowers. Poems by Father Edmund, of the Heart of 
Mary, CP. i 25 

Pearls from Faber. Brunowe. o so 

Pearls of Prayer. o 35 

People's Mission Book, The. Paper, o.io; per 100, 6 00 

Pepper and Salt, Spiritual. Stang. Paper, 0.30; 25 copies, 4 50 
Cloth, 0.60, 25 copies, 9 00 

Perfect Religious, The. De la Motte. Cloth, ttet, i 00 

Pictorial Lives of the Saints. New edition, with Reflections 
for Every Day in the Year. 8vo, 2 50 

Pious Preparation for First Holy Communion. Rev. F, X. 

Lasance. Cloth, o 75 

Pocket Manual. A Vest-pocket Prayer-book, very large type. 025 
Popular Instructions on Marriage. Girardey, C.SS.R. 

Paper, 0.25; 2s copies, 3 75 

Cloth, 0.40; 25 copies, 6 00 

6 



Popular Instructions on Prayer. Girardey, C.SS.R. 

Paper, 0.25; 25 copies, 3 75 

Cloth, 0.40; 25 copies, 6 00 

Popular Instructions to Parents on the Bringing Up o£ Children. 
By Very Rev. P. Girardey, C.SS.R. Paper, 0.25 ; 25 copies, 3 7S 
Cloth, 0.40; 25 copies, 6 00 

Prayer-book for Religious. A Complete Manual of Prayers 
and Devotions for the Use of the Members of all Religious 
Communities. By Rev. F. X. Lasance. net, i 50 

Preaching. Vo]._ XV. St. Alphonsus de Liguori. The Exercises 
of the Missions. Various Counsels. Instructions on the 
Commandments and Sacraments. net, i 25 

Preparation for Death. St. Alphonsus de Liguori. Considera- 
tions on the Eternal Truths. Maxims of Eternity. Rule of 
Life. net, i 25 

Prodigal Son; or. The Sinner's Return to God. net, i 00 

Reasonableness op Catholic Ceremonies and Practices. Rev. 

J. J. Burke. o 35 

Religious State, The. With a Treatise on the Vocation to the 
Priesthood. By St. Alphonsus de Liguori. o 50 

Revelations of the Sacred Heart to Blessed Margaret Mary. 

Bougaud. Cloth, net, i 50 

Rosary, The, the Crown of Mary. By a Dominican Father. 010 
per 100, 5 00 

Rosary, The Most Holy. Meditations. Cramer. o 50 

Sacramentals of the Holy Catholic Church. Rev. A. A. 
Lambing, D.D. Paper, 0.30; 25 copies, 4 50 

Cloth, 0.60; 25 copies, 9 00 

Sacramentals — Prayer, etc. Rev. M. Miiller, C.SS.R. net, 1 00 
Sacred Heart Book, The. By Rev. F. X. Lasance. o 75 

Sacred Heart, Little Prayer-Book op the. o 40 

Sacred Heart, The. Rev. Dr. Joseph Keller. o 75 

Sacrifice of the Mass Worthily Celebrated, The. Rev. 

Father Chaignon, S.J. net, i 50 

Secret of Sanctity. St. Francis de Sales. net, i 00 

Seraphic Guide, The. A Manual for the Members of the Third 
Order of St. Francis. By a Franciscan Father. o 60 

Short Conferences on the Little Office of the Immaculate 
Conception. Very Rev. J. Rainer. o 50 

Short Stories on Christian Doctrine. From the French by 
Mary McMahon. net, o 75 

Short Visits to the Blessed Sacrament. Lasance. o 25 

Sick Calls; or, Chapters on Pastoral Medicine. By the Rev. 
Alfred Manning MulHgan, Birmingham, England. net, i 00 

SODALISTS' VaDE MeCUM. O 50 

Songs and Sonnets. Maurice Francis Egan. i oo 

Souvenir op the Novitiate. Rev. Edward I. Taylor, net, o 60 
Spiritual Crumbs for Hungry Little Souls. Richardson, o 50 
Spiritual Despondency and Temptations. By Rev. P. J, Michel, 
S.J. From the French by Rev. F. P. Garesch^, S.J. net, i 25 



Spiritual Exercises for a Ten Days* Retreat. Very Rev. R. v. 

Smetana, C.SS.R. net, i oo 

Spiritual Pepper and Salt. Stang. Paper, 0.30; 25 copies, 450 
Cloth, 0.60; 25 copies, 9 00 

St. Anthony, Little Manual of. o 60 

St. Anthony. Rev. Dr. Jos. Keller. o 75 

Stations of the Cross. Illustrated. o 50 

Stories for First Communicants. Rev. J. A. Keller, D.D. o 50 
Striving after Perfection. Rev. Joseph Bayma, S.J. net, i 00 
Sure Way to a Happy Marriage. Rev. Edward I. Taylor. 

Paper, 0.25; 25 copies, 3 75 

Cloth, 0.40; 25 copies, 6 00 

Thoughts and Counsels for the Consideration of Catholic Young 
Men. Rev. P. A. Doss, S.J. net, i 25 

Thoughts for All Times. Mgr. Vaughan. o 90 

Traveller's Daily Companion. 0.05; per 100, 3 50 

True Politeness. Abbe Francis Demore. net, o 60 

True Spouse of Jesus Christ. St. Alphonsus de Liguori. 2 vols. 
Centenary Edition, net, 2 50 

The same, one-vol. edition, net, i 00 

Two Spiritual Retreats for Sisters. Rev. E. Zollner. net, i 00 
Veneration of the Blessed Virgin. Her Feasts, Prayers, Re- 
ligious Orders, and Sodalities. Rev. B. Rohner, O.S.B. i 25 
Vest-Pocket Gems of Devotion. o 20 

Victories of the Martyrs; or. The Lives of the Most Celebrated 
Martyrs of the Chtirch. Vol. IX. Alphonsus de Liguori. net, i 25 
Visits, Short, to the Blessed Sacrament. Lasance. o 25 

Visits to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. By the Author of 
"Avis Spirituels." o 50 

Visits to Jesus in the Tabernacle. Hours and Half-Hours of 
Adoration before the Blessed Sacrament. With a Nnvena to 
the Holy Ghost and Devotions for Mass, Holy Communion, etc. 
Rev. F. X. Lasance. Cloth, i 25 

Visits to the Most Holy Sacrament and £0 the Blessed Virgin 
Mary. St. Alphonsus de Liguori. o 50 

Vocations Explained: Matrimony, Virginity, The Religious State, 
and the Priesthood. By a Vincentian Father. 010 
100 copies, 6 00 

Way of Interior Peace. Rev. Father De Lehen, S.J. net, i 25 
Way of Salvation and Perfection. Meditations, Pious Reflec- 
tions, Spiritual Treatises. St. Alphonsus de Liguori. net, i 25 
Way of the Cross. Paper, 0.05; 100 copies, 2 50 

What the Church Teaches. An Answer to Earnest Inquirers. 
By Rev. Edwin Drury, Missionary Priest. 
Paper, 0.30; 25 copies, 4 50 

Cloth, 0.60; 25 copies, 9 00 

JUVENILES. 

Adventures of a Casket, o 45 

Adventures of a French Captain. o 45 

An Adventure with the Apaches, Gabriel Ferry. o 45 

8 



Anthony. A Tale of the Time of Charles II. of England. o 45 

Armorer of Solingen. William Herchenbach. o 40 

As True as Gold. Mary E. Mannix. o 45 

Berkleys, The. Emma Howard Wight. o 45 

Bertha; or, Consequences of a Fault. o 45 

Better Part. o 45 

BiSTOURi. A. Melandri. o 45 

Black Lady, and Robin Red Breast. Canon Schmid. o 25 

Blanche de Marsilly. o 45 

Bliss YLVANiA Post-Office. Marion Ames Taggart. o 45 

Bob o' Link. Mary T. Waggaman. o 45 

Boys in the Block. Maurice F. Egan. o 25 

Bric-a-Brac Dealer. o 45 

Bunt and Bill. Clara MulhoUand. o 45 

Buzzer's Christmas. Mary T. Waggaman. o 25 

By Branscome River. Marion Ames Taggart. o' 45 

Cake and the Easter Eggs. Canon Schmid. o 25 

Canary Bird. Canon Schmid. o 40 

Captain Rougemont. o 45 

Carroll Dare. By Mary T. Waggaman. i 25 

Cassilda; or, The Moorish Princess. o 45 

Catholic Home Library. 10 vols. Each, o 45 

Cave by the Beech Fork, The. Spalding, S.J. Cloth o 85 

College Boy, A. Anthony Yorke. Cloth, o 85 

Conversations on Home Education. o 45 

Dimpling' s Success Clara Mulholland. o 45 

Episodes of the Paris Commune. o 45 

Every-Day Girl, An. Mary C. Crowley. o 45 

Fatal Diamonds. E. C. Donnelly. o 25 
Finn, Rev. F. J., S.J.: 

His First and Last Appearance. Illustrated. i 00 

That Football Game. o 85 

The Best Foot Forward. o 85 

Ethelred Preston. o 85 

Claude Lightfoot. o 85 

Harry Dee. o 85 

Tom Playfair. o 85 

Percy Wynn. o 85 

Mostly Boys. o 85 

Fisherman's Daughter. o 45 

Five O' Clock Stories; or. The Old Tales Told Again. 075 
Flower of the Flock, The, and the Badgers of Belmont. Maurice 

F. Egan. o 85 

Fred's Little Daughter. Sara Trainer Smith. o 45 

Gertrude's Experience. o 45 

Godfrey the Hermit. Canon Schmid. o 25 

Golden Lily, The. Katharine T. Hinkson. o 45 

9 



Great Captain, The. By Katharine T. Hinkson. o 45 

Great-Grandmother's Secret. o 4.5 

Haldeman Children, The. By Mary E. Mamiix. o 43 

Harry Dee; or, Working It Out. By Father Finn. o 85 
Harry Russell. A Rockland College Boy. By Rev. J. E. 

Copus. S.J. [Cuthbert]. o 85 

Heir of Dreams, An. SalUe Margaret O'Malley. o 45 

Her Father's Right Hand. o 45 

His First and Last Appearance. By Father Finn. i 00 

Hop Blossoms. Canon Schmid. o 25 

Hostage of War, A. Mary G. Bonesteel. o 45 

How They Worked Their Way. Maurice F. Egan. o 75 

Inundation, The. Canon Schmid. o 40 

Jack Hildreth Among the Indians. 2 vols. Each, o 85 
Jack Hildreth on the Nile. Marion Ames Taggart. Cloth, o 85 

Jack O' Lantern. Mary T. Waggaman. o 45 

Juvenile Round Table. i 00 

Klondike Picnic. Eleanor C. Donnelly. o 85 

Lamp of the Sanctuary. Cardinal Wiseman. o 25 
Legends of the Holy Child Jesus from Many Lands. A. Fowler 

Lutz. o 75 

Little Missy. Mary T. Waggaman. o 43 

Loyal Blue and Royal Scarlet. Marion A. Taggart. o 85 

Madcap Set at St. Anne's. Marion J. Brunowe. o 45 

Marcelle. a True Story. o 45 

Mary Tracy's Fortune. Anna T. Sadlier. o 45 

Master Fridolin. Emmy Giehrl. o 25 

Milly Aveling. Sara Trainer Smith. Cloth, o 85 

Mysterious Doorway. Anna T. Sadlier. o 45 

Nan Nobody. Mary T. Waggaman. 045 

Old Charlmont's Seed-Bed. Sara Trainer Smith. o 45 

Old Robber's Castle. Canon Schmid. o 25 

Olive and the Little Cakes. o 45 

Our Boys' and Girls' Library. 14 vols. Each, o 25 

Our Young Folks' Library. 10 vols. Each, o 45 

Overseer of Mahlbourg, Canon Schmid. o 25 

Pancho and Panchita. Mary E. Mannix. o 40 

Pauline Archer. Anna T. Sadlier. o 45 

Pickle and Pepper. Ella Loraine Dorse y. o 85 

Playwatbr Plot, The. By Mary T. Waggaman. o 60 

Priest op Auvrigny. o 45 

Queen's Page. Katharine Tynan Hinkson. o 45 

Recruit Tommy Collins. Mary G. Bonesteel. o 45 

Richard; or, Devotion to the Stuarts. o 43 

Rose Bush. Canon Schmid. o aS 
10 



Round Table. Juvenile. Illustrated. i oo 

Saint Cuthbert's. By Rev. J. E. Ck)pus, S.J. o 8s 

Sea-Gull's Rock. J. Sandeau. o 45 

Sheriff of thk Beech Fork, The. Spalding, S.J. o 8s 

Summer at Woodville, Anna T. Sadlier. o 45 

Strong-Arm of Avalon. By Mary T. Waggaman. o 85 
Tales and Legends of the Middle Ages. F. De Capella. 075 

Tales and Legends Series. 3 vols. Each, o 75 

Talisman, The. By Anna T. Sadlier, o 60 

Taming of Polly. Ella Loraine Dorsey, o 8s 
Three Girls and Especially One Marion A. Taggart. o 4s 

Three Little Kings. Emmy Giehrl. , o s.t; 

Tom's Luckpot. Mary T. Waggaman. o 4s 

Treasure of Nugget Mountain, M. A, Taggart. o 85 

Two Little Girls. By Lilian Mack, o 45 

Village Steeple, The, o 4s 

Wager of Gerald O'Rourke, The, Finn-Thiele. net, o 35 
WiNNETOu, the Apache Knight, Marion Ames Taggart. o 8s 

Wrongfully Accused. William Herchenbach, o 40 

Young Color Guard, The. By Mary G. BonesteeL o 45 

NOVELS AND STORIES. 
"But Thy Love and Thy Grace." Rev. F. J. Finn, S.J. r 00 
Circus Rider's Daughter, The. A Novel, P. v. Brackel. i 25 
Connor D'Arcy's Struggles. A Novel. Bertholds. i 25 

Corinne's Vow. Mary T. Waggaman. 125 
Dion and the Sibyls. A Classic Novel. Miles Keon. Cloth, x 25 
Fabiola; or, The Church of the Catacombs. By Cardinal Wiseman. 

Popular Illustrated Edition, o 90 

Fabiola' s Sisters. A Companion Volume to Cardinal Wiseman's 

"Fabiola." A. C. Clarke. i 35 

Fatal Beacon, The, A Novel. By F. v. Brackel. i 25 

Hearts of Gold. A Novel. By I. Edhor. i 25 

Heiress op Cronenstein, The. Countess Hahn-Hahn. i 25 
Her Father's Daughter. Katharine Tynan Hinkson. tut, x 25 
Idols; or. The Secret of the Rue Chaussee d'Antin. De Navery. 

I 25 

In the Days op King Hal. Marion Ames Taggart. net, x 25 
"Kind Hearts and Coronets." A Novel. By J. Harrison. 1 25 
Let No Man Put Asunder. A Novel. Josephine Mari6, z 00 
Linked Lives. A Novel. Lady Gertrude Douglas. i 50 

Marcella Grace. A Novel. Rosa MulhoUand. Illustrated 
Edition. i 25 

Miss Erin. A Novel. M. E. Francis. i 25 

Monk's Pardon, The. Raoul de Navery, i 25 

Mr. Billy Buttons. A Novel. Walter Lecky, z 25 

Outlaw of Cauargub, The, A Novel. A. de Lamothe. x as 
II 



Passing Shadows. A Novel. Anthony Yorke. i 25 

Peee Monnier's Ward. A Novel. Walter Lecky. 1 25 

PiLKiNGTON Heir, The. A Novel. By Anna T. Sadlier. i 25 
Prodigal's Daughter, The. Lelia Hardin Bugg. i 00 

Romance of a Playwright. Vte. Henri de Bornier. i 00 

Round Table of the Representative American Catholic 
Novelists. i 50 

Round Table of the Representative French Catholic Novel- 
ists. I 50 
Round Table of the Representative German Catholic 
Novelists. Illustrated. i 50 
Round Table of the Representative Irish and English Cath- 
olic Novelists. ' i 50 
True Story of Master Gerard, The. By Anna T. Sadlier. i 25 
Unraveling of a Tangle, The. By Marion A. Taggart. i 25 
Vocation of Edward Conway. A Novel. Maurice F. Egan. i 25 
Woman of Fortune, A. Christian Reid. i 25 
World Well Lost. Esther Robertson. o 75 

LIVES AND HISTORIES. 

Autobiography op St. Ignatius Loyola. Edited by Rev. J. F. X. 

O' Conor. Cloth. net, r 25 

Bible Stories for Little Children. Paper, o.io. Cloth, o 20 
Church History. Businger. o 75 

Historiographia Ecclesiastica quam Historiae seriam Solidamque 

OperamNavantibus.AccornmodavitGuil. Stang, D.D. net, i 00 
History of the Catholic Church. Brueck. 2 vols. net, 3 00 
History op the Catholic Church. Shea. i 5° 

History of the Protestant Reformation in England and 

Ireland. Wm. Cobbett. Cloth, net, o 75 

Letters of St. Alphonsus Liguori. Rev. Eugene Grimm, C.SS.R. 

Centenary Edition. 5 vols., each, net, i 25 

Life and Life-Work of Mother Theodore Guerin, Foundress 

of the Sisters of Providence at St.-Mary-of -the- Woods, Vigo 

County, Indiana. net, 2 00 

Life of Christ. Illustrated. Father M. v. Cochem. i 25 

Life op Fr. Francis Poilvache, C.SS.R. Paper, net, o 20 

Life of Most Rev. John Hughes. Brann. ftet, o 75 

Life of Mother Fontbonne, Foundress of the Sisters of St. Joseph 

of Lyons. Abbe Rivatix. Cloth, net, i 25 

Life of Sister Anne Katherine Emmerich, of the Order of St. 

Augustine. Rev. Thomas Wegener, O.S.A. net, i 50 

Life of St. Anthony. Ward. Illustrated. o 75 

Life of St. Catharine of Sienna. Edward L. Aym^, M.D. i 00 
Life of St. Clare of Montefalco. Locke, O.S.A. net, o 75 
Life of Mlle. Le Gras. net, 1 25 

Life of St. Chantal. Bougaud. 2 vols. net, 4 00 

Life of the Blessed Virgin. Illustrated, Rohner, O.S.B. i 25 

13 



Little Lives or Saints for Children. Illustrated. Cloth, o 7^ 
Little Pictorial Livks of the Saints. New, cheap edition, i 00 
Lives OF the Saints. With Reflections for Every Day. i 50 

Our Ladv of Good Counsel in Genazzano. o 75 

Pictorial Lives of the Saints. Cloth. 2 50 

Reminiscences of Rt. Rev. E. P V/adhams, net, i 00 

St. Anthony, the Saint op the Whole World. 075 
Story of Jesus. Illustrated. o 60 

Story of the Divine Child. Very Rev. Dean A. A. Lings. 075 
Victories of the Martyrs. St. Alphonsus de Liguori. net, i 25 
Visit to Europe and the Holy Land. Rev. H, Fairbanks, i 50 

THEOLOGY LITURGY, SERMONS. SCIENCE, AND 
PHILOSOPHY. 

Abridged Sermons, for All Sundays of the Year. St. Alphonsus 
de Liguori. Centenary Edition. Grimm, C.SS.R. net, i 25 
Blessed Sacrament, Sermons on the. Edited by Rev. F. X. 

Lasance. net, i 50 

Breve Compendium Theologiae Dogmaticae et Moralis. 

Berthier. net, 2 50 

Children of Mary, Sermons for this. From the Italian of 
Rev. F. Callerio. Edited by Rev. R. P. Clarke, S.J. net, 1 50 
Children's Masses, Sermons for. Frassinetti-Lings. net, i 50 
Christian Anthropology. Sermons. Hev. John Thein. net, 2 50 
Christian Apologetics. B/ Rev. W. Devivier, S.J. Edited by 
the Rt. Rev. S. G. Messmer, D.D. net, i 75 

Christian Philosophy. A Treatise on the Human Soul. Rev. 

J. T. DriscoU, S.T.L. net, i 50 

Christian Philosophy. God. DriscoU. net, 1 25 

Christ in Type and Prophecy. Maas, S.J. 2 vols., net, 4 00 
Church Announcement Book. net, 025 

Church Treasurer's Pew-Collection and Receipt Book, net, 1 00 
Compendium Juris Canonici. Smith. net, 2 00 

Compendium Juris Regularium. EdiditP.Aug. Bacholen, net, 2 50 
Compendium Sacrae Liturgiae Juxta Ritum Romanum una cum 
Appendice de Jure Ecclesiastico Particulari in America Foe- 
darata Sept. vigente scripsit P. Innocentius Wapelhorst, 
O.S.F. Editio sexta emendation net, 2 50 

Compendium Theologiae Dogmaticae et Moralis. Berthier. 

net, 2 so 

Confessional. The. Right Rev. A. Roeggl, D.D. net, i 00 

D.E Philosophia Morali Praelectiones. Russo. net, 2 00 

Ecclesiastical Dictionary. Rev. John Thein. net, 5 00 

Elements of Ecclesiastical Law. Rev. S. B. Smith, D.D. 
Ecclesiastical Persons. net, 2 50 

Ecclesiastical Punishments. net, 2 50 

Ecclesiastical Trials. net, 2 50 

Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII. net, 2 00 

Funeral Sermons. Rev. Aug. Wirth, O.S.B. 2 vols., net, 2 00 
General Introduction to the Study of Holy Scriptures. Rev. 
Francis E. Gigot, S.S. Cloth, net, 2 00 

13 



God Knowable and Known. Rev. Maurice Ronayne, S.J.net, t 25 
Good Christian, The. Rev. J. Allen, D.D. 2 vols., net, 5 00 
History of thb Mass. Rev. John O'Brien. net, i 25 

Hunolt's Sermons. 12 vols., net. 25 00 

Hunolt's Short Sermons. 5 vols., lo 00 

Introduction to the Study of the Scriptures. Gigot. itet, 2 50 
Introduction to the Study of the Old Testament. Vol. I. 

Gigot. net, 1 50 

Jesus Living in the Priest. Millet-Byrne. net, 2 00 

Last Things, Sermons on the Four. Hunolt. 2 vols, ttet, 5 00 
Lenten Sermons. Edited by Rev. Aug. Wirth, O.S.B. mt, 2 00 
Liber Status Animarum. Pocket Edition, net, 0.25; half 

leather, net, 2 00 

Moral Principles and Medical Practice, the Basis of Medical 

Jurisprudence. Rev. Charles Coppens, S.J. net, 1 50 

Natural Law and Legal Practice. Holaind, S.J. net, i 75 
New AND Old Sermons. Wirth, O.S.B. 8 vols., net, 16 00 

Outlines OP Dogmatic Theology. Hunter, S.J. 3 vols., net, 4 50 
Outlines of Jewish History. By Gigot, S.S. net, x 50 

Outlines op New Testament History. Gigot. Cloth, net, i 50 
Pastoral Theology. Rev. Wm. Stang, D.D. net, x 50 

Penance, Sermons on. Hunolt, 2 vols., net, 5 00 

Pew-Rent Receipt Book. net, 1 00 

Philosophia de Morali. Russo. net, 3 00 

Political and Moral Essays. Rickaby, S.J. net, i 50 

Praxis Synodalis. Manuale Synodi Diocesanae ac Provincialis 

Celebrandae. net, o 60 

Registrum Baptismorum. ttet, 3 50 

Registrum Matrimoniorum. net, 3 50 

Relation of Experimental Psychology to Philosophy. Mgr. 

Mercier. net, o 35 

Rituale Compendiosum seu Ordo Administrandi qmedam Sacra- 

menta et alia Officia Ecclesiastica Rite Peragendi ex Rituali 

Romano, novissime editio desumptas. net, o 90 

Rosary, Sermons on the Most Holy. Frings. net, i 00 

Sacred Heart, Six Sermons on Devotion to the. By Rev. 

Dr. E. Bierbaum. net, o 60 

Sanctuary Boys' Illustrated Manual. Rev. J. A. McCallen, 

S.S. net. o 50 

Sermon Manuscript Book. net, s 00 

Sermons, Hunolt's. 12 vols., net, 25 00 

Sermons, Abridged, for Sundays. Liguori. net, i 25 

Sermons for Children of Mary. Callerio. net, i 50 

Sermons for Children's Masses. Frassinetti-Lings. net, t so 
Sermons for the Sundays and Chief Festivals of the Ecclesi- 
astical Year. Rev. J. Pottgeisser, S.J. 2 vols., net, 2 50 
Sermons from the Latins. Baxter. net, 2 00 

Sermons, Funeral. Wirth. 2 vols., net, 2 00 

Sermons, Hunolt's Short, 5 vols, net, 10 po 

Sbrmons, Lenten. Wirth. net. 2 00 

14 



Sermoks, New and Old. Wirth. 8 vols.» n«i, i6 oo 

Sermons on Devotion to Sacred Heart. Bierbauin. net, o 75 
Sermons on Our Lord, the Blessed Virgin, and the Saints. 

Hunolt. 2 vols,, net, 5 00 

Sermons on Penance. Hxinolt. 2 vols., net, 5 00 

Sermons on the Blessed Sacrament. Scheurer-Lasance. net, i 50 
Sermons on the Christian Virtues. Hunolt. Translated by Rev. 

John Allen, 2 vols., net, 5 00 

Sermons on the Four Last Things. Hunolt. 2 vols., net, 5 00 
Sermons on the Rosary. Frings. net, t 00 

Sermons on the Seven Deadly Sins. H\molt. 2 vols., net, 5 00 
Sermons on the States of Life. Hunolt. 2 vols., net, 5 00 
Short Sermons. By Rev. F. Hunolt, S.J. 5 vols., 10 00 

Short Sermons for Low Masses. Schouppe, S.J. fiet, i 25 
Socialism Exposed and Refuted. Cathrein. net, i 00 

Special Introduction to the Study op the Old Testament. 

Part I. Gigot. net, i 50 

Synopsis Theologiae Dogmaticae ad Mentbm S. Thomae Aqui- 

NATis. Tanquerey, S.S. 3 vols., net, s 25 

Synopsis Theologia Moralis et Pastoralis. Tanquerey. 2 vols., 

net, 3 so 

Theologia Dogmatica Specialis. Tanquerey. 2 vols., net, 3 50 
Theologia Fundamentalis. Tanquerey. net, i 75 

Virtues, Sermons on the Christian. Hunolt. 2 vols., net, 5 00 

MISCELLANEOUS. 
A Gentleman. M. F. Egan, LL.D. o 75 

A Lady. Manners and Social Usages. Lelia Hardin Bugg. o 75 
Benziger's Magazine. Per year, a 00 

Bone Rules ; or, Skeleton of English Grammar. Tabb, A.M. o 50 
Cantata Catholica. B. H. F. Hellebusch. net, » 00 

Catholic Home Annual. Stories by Best Writers. o 25 

Correct Thing for Catholics, The. Lelia Hardin Bugg. o 75 
Elocution Class. Eleanor O'Grady. net, o 50 

Ete op the Reformation, The. Rev. Wm. Stang. Paper, 

net, o 25 

Guide for Sacristans and Others Having Charge of the Altar and 
Sanctuary. By a Member of an Altar Society. net, 075 

Hints ON Letter- Writing. " Golden Sands." 060 
How TO Get On. Rev. Bernard Feeney. i 00 

Hymm-Book op Sunday-School Companion. o 35 

Little Folks' Annual, o.io; per 100, 7 50 

New Sunday-School Companion. o 25 

Readings and Recitations for Juniors. O'Grady. net, o 50 
Select Recitations for Catholic Schools and Academies. 

Eleanor O'Grady. i 00 

Statistics Concerning Education in the Philippines. Hedges. 

o 10 

SursumCorda. Hymns. Cloth, 0.2s; per 100, 15.00. Paper, o. is; 
per zoo, lo.oe; with English and German Text, o 45 

15 



BENZIGER'S MAGAZINE 



The Popular Catholic Family Monthly. 

SUBSCRIPTION, $2.00 A YEAR. 

14^hat "Ben^iiger's Maga:{ine gives 
its Readers: 

1. Fifty complete stories by the best writers — equal to a book of 

300 pages selling at $1.25. 

2. Three complete novels of absorbing interest — equal to three 

books selling at $1.25 each. 

3. Seven hundred beautiful illustrations. 

4. Forty large reproductions of celebrated paintings. 

5. Forty storiettes. 

6. Tvs^enty articles — equal to a book of 150 pages, on travel and 

adventure ; on the manners, customs and home-life of 
peoples; on the haunts and habits of animal life, etc. 

7. Twenty articles — equal to a book of 150 pages — on our country ; 

historic events, times, places, important industries. 

8. Twenty articles — equal to a book of 150 pages — on the fine 

arts; celebrated artists and their paintings, sculpture, 
music, etc., and nature studies. 

9. Articles by Father Finn, the most popular writer for the 

young. 

10. Twelve pages of games and amusements for in and out of doors. 

11. Fifty pages of fashions, fads and fancies, gathered at home 

and abroad, helpful hints for home workers, household 
column, cooking receipts, etc. 

12. " Current Events," the important happenings over the whole 

world, described with pen and pictures, 

13. Twelve prize competitions, in which valuable prizes are offered. 

14. Premium Coupons, worth 20 cents on every dollar in purchas- 

ing books advertised in the Magazine. 

THIS IS WHAT IS GIVEN IN A SINGLE YEAR OF 
BENZIGER'S MAGAZINE. 

16 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Dec. 2004 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 
1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-2111 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




0 013 590 815 0 



